How is it that women (or some of them) are able to go around saying they are oppressed by ridiculous things such as catcalls and slut-shaming, but then are able to ridicule guys for simply being upset about the friend zone? Western feminism is RIDICULOUS…
The biggest problem these two ideologies (for lack of a better word) have with each other is created by the harassment perpetuated by the members of Men’s Rights Activism. MRAs claim feminists have not a care for them, and feminists say that MRAs are…
Which one of us is oppressed again? You just whisper to yourself “It’s just the Patriarchy backfiring!” so you can wear your new cotton clothes and not feel ashamed one bit.
And women claim to be so oppressed. You can’t wear extremely revealing clothing without others…
You know, when you have kids and you love them and you’re proud of them you just want to kiss them on the mouth sometimes.
Lately, all of these discussions about feminism and male rights reminded me of a certain episode of a certain show I watched growing up.
Oh my goddd… the things that kids shows can get away with sometimes I swear… this was amazing! Whoever wrote this episode must have had a pretty bad run in with some radfems…
This is awesome.
The part where they tell about Susan B Anthony to showcase her (the villainess’) hypocrisy…brought a tear to my eye. That was so awesome!
What I’m responding to here.
To start off, let us go way back to our hunter and gather era. We were pretty true to our biological roles back then. Men were the providers and protectors for the women so that the women could safely look after and raise the children. These roles developed very…
I don’t know where you gathered your non-scientific crap, but I am more than happy to enlighten you on new scientific researches. First of all the “theories” you described here are from the late 50’s. Guess who invented them and for what reason. Of course it were men, and they promoted it after WWII to get woman again back behind the hearth. Media stated this as an unchangeable fact that woman always had to take care of the children and cook for their family (since they did so in the stone age). If there would have been enough female researchers at that time, this probably would have never happen, like we know today.
First of all, woman hunted together with men in the prehistoric age. While hunting for one week out of the month did not provide the majority of the meals in prehistoric times, it did allow for cooperation between the sexes. Hunting did not mean fighting as most forms of hunting did not involve aggressive personal combat. Instead it meant preying on slow-moving animals like turtles, wounded or sick animals, females about to give birth, or on carcasses killed and abandoned by other fiercer predators. Men and women relied on each other’s skills before, during and after the hunt.
There are a lot of reasearches about still existing hunter/gathering tribes around the world, and in fact, woman go hunting together with men, and they did so for centuries. And even the so praised physical advantages men have, weren’t enough to kill a mammoth alone. Probably they set up traps to kill big animals but these traps where constructed together with woman. You claim the problem solving skill for men? You are wrong. Show me one neurological research where something like this was proven. I know of none.Most forward-thinking scholars are now attributing to women inventions that previously were credited to men. Many are now saying that hunting was a later development than gathering, and thus women were the earliest inventors of tools. Women used bones and stones, which have been found, but lengths of wood they used to dig up roots have not survived except for the ones that were pointed and fire-hardened. Artifacts of axes, spears, and arrows used in hunting are numerous,which is the reason that men have hitherto been given more credit than women. Women in their roles of gathering, preserving, and storing food stuffs would undoubtedly have invented weaving and pottery making. (for both citations I used this source but I am sure you’ll find more)And humans would have probably go extinct if there weren’t woman gathering food, because the meat that was hunted wasn’t enough to survive. 80% percent of food that were consumend back than were vegetables, fruits etc (I got this from a german source, though you probably won’t be able to read it)
I recommend you to read the Earth’s Children series by Jean M. Auel. She did a whole lot of research and the books describe a really different picture of what you stated in your post, and she described a gender equal society which was never reached in history again.Next topic. The wage gap. You stated in a previous post (it was an reply on an ask) that the stats on the gender pay gape are forged. You are partly right. There exist unadjusted and adjusted statistics on the gender pay gap. So let’s only talk about the adjusted statistics. I have no Idea what it’s like in the US, but in good old europe there is a signifance difference. For germany the difference lies around 8%. Should this be different in the US, with no difference in the pay between women and men, women in the US can still claim this as an argument. You know why? Because they are solitary with women around the world. This isn’t a one country only problem, but an international one. Like european homosexuals are solitary with those in the US fighting for gay marriage. This is legitimate and important.Though to tell you honestly the wage gap isn’t my main problem. There are bigger ones. You know who is most likely threatend by poverty? Single mothers, you know who is the most affected? The children.According to a 2010 study by the U.S. Census Bureau, the percentage of married couple families living in poverty was 6.2%. For single-parent households in that same year, the poverty rate was 27.3%; for single mother households, the poverty rate was 29.9%. (source)80% of the single housholds are mothers with their children. They even are threatend by poverty if they work. You know how they get out of poverty? Through marriage. Which is completely absurd. So there aren’t any welfare programs, so that women have the possibility to raise their child alone! This in my opinion is much bigger problem than the wage gap. (the same applies for naturally for men, though as far as I know, woman are much more threatend than man)Your next argument was, that women earn less, because they choose the wrong jobs, right? Also you supported your argument with this study, right? Which is quite funny, because you first argumented with men being hunters and some biological pseudo scientific crap, but then use apes to prove a another argument. You’ve ever seen an ape go hunting and eating meat? I guess not. But okay at least this time you provided a scientific research.First of all, let’s summarize how the study was set up. Children were asked to define toys into masculine and female toys resulting in doll and pan for girls, orange ball and police car for boys, followed by picture book and furry dog for both genders. Now they had some apes inside a cage and the researchers measured the time the apes had contact with one toy. After that they set it in relation to the gender of the apes. Let’s look at the results: If you compare the male results between the pan and the car, you’ll notice that males spend more time or rather the same with the red pan than/as the police car.Something that also needs to be recognized while we talk about the study that they took two toys with signal colors, an orange ball and a red pan. I don’t know much about apes, but there could be the possibility that apes react to signal colors, which is completely ignored in your argumentation. Another point that needs to be considerd, is that apes have no concept whatsoever on cars and vehicles, what they are used for etc. The authors themselves state that this experiment is in no way applicable on humans, but you use it without all those facts, claiming it as an unchangeble fact.There is another study which nearly had the same setting, though they just used a toy car and plush toys. They couldn’t find any difference between the female apes, meaning that the females had contact with every toy about the same amount of time. And the male apes spend significant more time with the car than the other toys. Though there is no explanation why they did. And clearly not because they are boys and are more interested in cars or more interested in technical things. I’ve never heard of an ape inventing a wheel.I think you know that humans are influencd by two main factors: genes and enviroment. What you probably don’t know (as long as you don’t major/majored something with psychology, but then again you wouldn’t write so much crap) is how scientists try to research on the influence of envrioment. The only(!) method which is scientifically recognized for research are twin-studies. Still, these are highly debatable. How many identical twins do you know that were seperated after birth and grew up in different enviroments? The basis of an objective study is are a large number of cases (representation) which are randomnized. But it’s hard enough to even find twins that were seperated. My point is that it’s really, really hard to research the socialization of humans. Gender roles are a construct mainly set up by society, so they fall within that category. You may use apes as an example but it’s nearly invalid as an argument because human society is much more complex than that one of apes and it completely neglects the influence of enviroment. Just because it’s easier to research biology and brain functions it doesn’t mean that it’s the only factor that determines the behaviour and the cognitive and emotional development of humans.Lastly let’s talk about professions, the different wages of these professions and how they are related to gender. (I won’t discuss the rape topic, first I did this before, search my blog, and secondly it’s politically charged and I have no interest in discussing if it’s ethical okay if a boy can’t control his desires. Since this is where it all ends if you try to find the reason of a male offender through asking for the clothes a victim was wearing while being sexually abused. But it would have been nice if you would have added a source for your african rape culture theory and how often this is practiced, otherwise it seems like every HIV infected african rapes women)You stated women are free to choose their major and all of them make a concious decision for their later profession. Again you are completelely ignoring enviromental facts. First of all I want to tell you about the theory of self-efficacy.Self-efficacy affects every area of human endeavor. By determining the beliefs a person holds regarding his or her power to affect situations, it strongly influences both the power a person actually has to face challenges competently and the choices a person is most likely to make. These effects are particularly apparent, and compelling, with regard to behaviors affecting healthNaturally scientist tried to find out if the reason for the low number of women taking up natural sciences is connected to a low self- efficacy. And surpise, it isWomen generally judge themselves as being less efficacious then men for scientific occupations requiring quantitative skills, such as engineering and computing (typical male vocations where the percentage of women is equal or less than 25%), whereas men judge themselves less efficacious than women for education and psychology (typical female occupations where the percentage of men is equal or less than 25%; Wender, 1999).Hackett (1995) provided empirical data that supports the theory that the low proportion of women in technical vocations can be traced back to women’s low perceived self-efficacy regarding technical problem-solving skills.(source)So now you tell me what the reason for this is, if not stereotyped gender roles. You know what girls hear all day long while growing up? “You don’t need to be good in math because you are a girl.” Otherwise how could girls start to think that they are bad at problem solving. Why should they? They have the same brain as men. Their brain functions work exactly the same way as male brains while solving problems. It is regardless of gender! Bandura gives another reason for low self-efficacy. He states that the lack of role-models enhances it. Role models are often people whom the learner himself can identify with, so girls mainly learn from women whereas boys learn from men. Tell me how many female scientist do you know? What do you learn in school about female scientist? And for which behaviour gain girls praise or rather which behaviour of girls is welcomed by society? Clearly not being good in natural science (look at all those hollywood movies, and think about how girls who are good in math are portrayed generally). By the way the same applies to men, why should a guy take up social science? he will be labled as weakling, who won’t earn enough income.Which is in my opinion another big factor, the later income of your major. Which are the professions with low incomes and where is the majority of women working. On this graphic you can clearly see that the occupations which are dominated by women have low wages, whereas all the subjects dominated by men have high salaries. Now the important question, why are the wages different. Is it because those professions are less important or easier? No, clearly they are not. Working with humans is difficult and exhausting like hell and nothing is more worth than the life of a human being. And till the 1950’s social sciences where also dominated by men and acknowledeged occupations (see psychology)Then, is this because society defines these professions by now as women professions or is it because these Majors are dominated by women? This is probably a question like which was first the chicken or the egg, but nonethlessness it’s important. Whatever the reason for the difference in wages, if we follow the theory of role models (which is scientifically proven) then it is NOT a decision by free choice. Men are expected to be good in natural science (who cares nowadays if they have a high empathy), plus they are expected to have high incomes. They need to be successful and are still viewed as the money bringer of families. Women in contrast are stereotyped as being caretakers of the family, with a high empathy and good team and communication skills.Oh, and maybe the reason for being good in problem solving or being good with team work lies within the training children receive from the moment they are born (starting with the clothes (pink or blue?) and the toy they receive ). And you CAN’T research all these factors because you will never be able to set up a complete scientific, objective study where every factor can be taken in.You are an ignorant dumbass who tries to support his arguments with pseudo-scientific statements. Although you could have, you’ve never once used a fucking source to prove those statements. With the little amount of knowledge you have, you’ve only shown that you try to make your mark by shouting out popular praloes which are completely outdated. The only reason I find why you would do this, is because you feel threatend by the opposite gender. There are a lot of male gender topics which are neglected: boys who have a lot of trouble to survive in a feminized educations system, sexual abuse of men, missing information centres for males, the encouragement of men to be the caretaker of the family instead of the money bringer by switching gender roles or promoting social science and humanities for men. But instead you do nothing but blaming and offending women with your absurd pseudo-logical theories. If you feel discriminated for being a man, you have the possibility to fight against the inequalities you observe, but for you there are none. If you are really interested in gender studies you would know that what you are doing day by day on your tumblr is nothing more then supporting a socially constructed, inequal system which pressures men and drives women - in the worst case - into poverty.Human society is far away from reaching gender equality, neither for women nor men. But if you don’t want to fight for your human rights, or don’t feel in any way wronged by being a man, then at least STOP blocking, offending and harming others, who fight against their discrimination.
I don’t know what the major issues are in Europe because my American media is incredibly bias and uninformative so I really have a difficult time collecting information about other countries besides my own. I will be the first one to tell you that the education in America is pathetic. I do not rely on it that much and I admit that our text books leave out a lot of information. So you can’t blame me for being brought up in a society that sets people up for ignorance. I like to think that I treat every issue skeptically because I’ve been lied to way too many times in the past. This is the biggest reason I don’t use sources a lot. I don’t trust the majority of them, as they will be skewed in some way. What I will say is that my statements are a combination of scientific research and personal opinions that I’ve put a lot of thought and analysis into.
I do not think that biology explains everything, however, I do believe it makes sense of a lot of things for myself.
To me, your last two paragraphs are funny. Because you said that I could be focusing on men’s gender topics that are neglected. But here in America, if I bring up any of those topics you listed, feminists will claim that those topics are completely fabricated in my own head. Lol. I really think you need to come to America and see what I see and hear what I hear in order to fully understand how the women are here. They are the ones using pseudoscience to justify their fabricated beliefs. You can’t even compliment women here without fearing about having a harassment charge pressed on you. There is no winning here in America if you are a man. No doubt that there are real shit men that do horrible things, but there is no reason for feminists to label all men as the same of these bottom feeders. This is what annoys me and which is a huge reason why I don’t support the hate group feminism. Along with the logical fallacy that feminist theory exists on. The patriarchy. That men are actively oppressing women and aiding only their fellow men. In order to believe the patriarchy, you have to believe that men actively oppress their mothers, daughters, and wives; the individuals that men have the most intimate relationships with in their entire lives. Speaking from own experience, I don’t think that men do that. Therefore, patriarchy probably isn’t a valid argument anymore. And since feminist theory can not exist without the patriarchy, then I presume that feminist theory is a load of bull.
Anyways, since feminists won’t acknowledge and neglect men’s issues, I will not acknowledge their issues. That is being pretty fair in my opinion. It’s as simple as not caring about someone that doesn’t care about you. And if going by feminist logic, making the people that have power over you hate you is not in your best interests. So yea, not wise.
What I’m responding to here.
To start off, let us go way back to our hunter and gather era. We were pretty true to our biological roles back then. Men were the providers and protectors for the women so that the women could safely look after and raise the children. These roles developed very interesting and useful biological adaptations unique to each gender to help with completing repeated tasks. Men developed faster reflexes by 10% compared to women. This helps with hunting and high risk situations. They also developed more muscle mass in order to keep up with the physical needs to hunt for food day in and day out. This may sound weird but men also developed better focus vision, in order to track their targets more effectively and intercept it’s path to get the kill. This leads to a controversial one, problem solving skills (logical thinking). It goes without saying that we’ve survived as a species due to our creative use of manipulating objects into useful tools. The need to give ourselves an edge in combat stemmed from the problem that we are not well equipped with sharp teeth or razor sharp claws suited for killing. And since men were doing the killing, they developed the strong problem solving skills to overcome this hurdle, thus propelling humanity’s advancement to what it is today.
Women on the other hand, developed different traits to complete different tasks. A big one I always hear, is multitasking. Women are great at multitasking because it is a desirable trait when taking care of children/babies. No doubt that this would be even more helpful when taking care of multiple children/babies. Which leads to my next point, peripheral vision. Just because women stayed close to the homestead, doesn’t mean that there weren’t any dangers present. So women got really good at spotting danger even when it was out of the corner of their eye. If you can get that awareness head start on your attacker, you have better chances of surviving. Women also are better at sympathy than men are. Being sympathetic helps a woman bond with her child and intuitively know what he/she needs when they’re crying. And to show that I’m not disagreeing with you, women do go through birth and experience what is described as one of if not the worst pains in the world. So their pain tolerance must have an edge over men in that regard.
Nonetheless, male traits are not better than female traits nor vice versa. Both genders have STRONG traits for what they specialize in. And these traits aren’t just seen in humans, we see these similar biological roles in other species as well.
Now to address modern feminist claims and how they ignore certain facts and observations in order to paint the picture in their favor.
“Men get paid more for doing the same job as women.” No, you’re just simply wrong. There is no evidence for this, in fact, any evidence you find support that men and women get paid and treated the same in the workforce. The only way you can believe that men get paid more than women is if you are ignoring the fact that there are laws that specifically state that there is no tolerance for gender discrimination in the workforce. If you got a job recently, they usually hand you a guidebook or manual of some sort, and somewhere within that manual, there will be a section dedicated to explaining how discrimination of any kind is punishable by law. So that’s a pretty big hole in your argument because society actively creates repercussions for discriminatory behavior. Any workplace that pays men more than women for the same job is doing so illegally and could get it big trouble if they’re caught.
Also, women are not being discouraged from entering male dominated fields of work. I don’t see any colleges forcing women to major in English, nursing, women’s studies, sociology, psychology ect. What you’re witnessing is the outcome of free women choosing to go to school, learn about what interests them, and finding jobs in the workplace that they enjoy. Do you know why so many people from other countries come to America to get their higher education? They will tell you that it is because they don’t have as much of a choice of what they can study in their country compared to how much freedom they would have if they lived in America. So with that knowledge, don’t you think that the reason women don’t dominate male dominated fields might be because women are less interested than men in those fields? I think it’s common sense.
Now on to the touchy stuff. Rape and “rape culture”. I put “rape culture” in quotes because it doesn’t describe Western modern society. “Rape culture” is what happens in Africa. When men diagnosed with HIV and AIDS believe in the myth that having sex with a virgin woman will cure them of their illness. So virgin women in Africa are countlessly raped and, since we all know that it doesn’t cure HIV or AIDS, it just further spreads them. Then more people get it, then they rape more virgin women, and it just gets worse and worse. This is the epitome of what rape culture really is.
We do not have that in Western modern society. Rape is illegal here. That alone should be enough to convince you that we don’t have rape culture but I suspect I need to elaborate more. We would have to culturally accept rape as an okay act in order for us to have a rape culture. Asking women “what they were wearing” when they were raped isn’t blaming them for their own rape. It’s a question in order to figure out why she got raped among other collective reasons. You obviously don’t know the judicial system even on a mediocre level because anyone who has watched a little bit of television knows that in an investigation, they usually try to figure out the motive behind the crime committed. In no sense are they condoning the crime because they’re trying to piece together the puzzle by asking the victim questions about the details of the incident.
I also just want to add emphasis that no one is forcing gender roles on anybody. To support this, there have been studies done to try and figure out how early gender roles are pushed on boys and girls and the findings support the contrary. Scientists conducted a study on new born infants where they placed a human face on the one side of a baby boy/girl and a mechanical toy on the other side of the baby boy/girl, then measured how often and how long they looked at either one. The results showed that the boy’s (especially ones with higher testosterone levels) tended to pay more attention to the mechanical toy and the girls tended to pay more attention to the face. These infants are far to young to have any gender role bias so the only logical explanation is that their biological roles influence them to a great degree. So even if you completely eliminate gender bias all together, boys would still be interested in playing with dinosaurs and girls would still be interested in playing with dolls.
Really, I’m only scratching the surface here and I still have a lot to learn myself. But with the little amounts of information like this that I know, I can rule out that feminist claims are not supported by biology. Feminist claims can only survive off of other feminists. Just like dogmatic religions can only exist if people buy into their teachings. It has no evidence to support it, and any evidence you find will most likely support the contrary. Ball is in your court.