|
Slobjob Zizek posted:What is the patriarchy? Define it, very specifically, please. Its the thing which prevented women from voting, made more men die in combat, encourages rape culture, kink-shaming and changing lanes without signalling properly.
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 08:31 |
|
|
Top Bunk Wanker posted:You make your black girlfriend wear a slave collar and beat her for sexual pleasure so you're probably not a person who should be authoritatively talking about gender issues. Wait, what?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:I no-joke agree with probably 80% of what would be considered a mainline feminist platform. Probably more. Educated and respected feminists aren't that simplistic in their arguments. What you're probably seeing and experiencing is the sort of uneducated rabble surrounding the cause. If you read some of the better literature it would become more apparent to you that the people just parroting patriarchy aren't the crux of the culture.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:23
|
|
|
Zeitgueist posted:The problem is a society that tells men that they are entitled to women. This is the problem.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Educated and respected feminists aren't that simplistic in their arguments. What you're probably seeing and experiencing is the sort of uneducated rabble surrounding the cause. If you read some of the better literature it would become more apparent to you that the people just parroting patriarchy aren't the crux of the culture. #NotAllFeminists
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:It seems pretty clear to me that a feminism without men's rights is anti-men, and a men's rights movement without women's rights is anti-women. Feminism doesn't address elephants or Subarus, do you find it anti-Elephant or anti-Japanese car as well?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
natetimm posted:Educated and respected feminists aren't that simplistic in their arguments. What you're probably seeing and experiencing is the sort of uneducated rabble surrounding the cause. If you read some of the better literature it would become more apparent to you that the people just parroting patriarchy aren't the crux of the culture. Oh most definitely. Pretty much any kind of political or social movement
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:What is the patriarchy? Define it, very specifically, please. Why are you asking me? What claims about it have I made about it specifically, beyond calling out someone who said some dumb poo poo where he obviously doesn't know what he's talking about? In any case, I'll just quote wikipedia (gee that was loving hard): quote:Patriarchy is a social system in which males are the primary authority figures central to social organization, occupy roles of political leadership, moral authority and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. Wow, it's a system where men generally hold the power. That seems like something that would affect lots of facets of society! Gee, it would be tough to figure out whether or not we live in one: Male US Presidents: 44 Female US Presidents: 0 Man that's weird.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Feminism doesn't address elephants or Subarus, do you find it anti-Elephant or anti-Japanese car as well? It is incredibly popular to support armed drones protecting elephants and rhino's from poachers in Africa.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
The Gay Marriage movement is anti-heterosexual because it's not called the Equal Marriage movement.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Lemming posted:In any case, I'll just quote wikipedia (gee that was loving hard): Ohhhh, so the procession of George Washington to Barack Obama is responsible for Eliot Rodger going on a virgin rampage. IT'S SO CLEAR. "Patriarchy" seems to mean nothing other than "status quo." At least the other leftist watchword, "capitalism," ACTUALLY means something (the private ownership of property).
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:It seems pretty clear to me that a feminism without men's rights is anti-men, and a men's rights movement without women's rights is anti-women. BUT WHAT ABOUT MEN Slobjob Zizek posted:"Patriarchy" seems to mean nothing other than "status quo."
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:31
|
|
|
For that matter, why was MLK out there marching just for black people, huh? What did he have against white people? Man I'm tired of him and the Klan constantly whining at each other. As a rational white male, I'm above that sort of thing 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
CheesyDog posted:The Gay Marriage movement is anti-heterosexual because it's not called the Equal Marriage movement. Actually it is often called the Marriage Equality movement, including in the title of the D&D thread.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Ohhhh, so the procession of George Washington to Barack Obama is responsible for Eliot Rodger going on a virgin rampage. IT'S SO CLEAR. No, actually, you can see in the post you quoted that it does mean something. Let me copy it again for you, maybe you'll read it the second time: quote:Patriarchy is a social system in which males are the primary authority figures central to social organization, occupy roles of political leadership, moral authority and control of property, and where fathers hold authority over women and children. So yes, that is currently the status quo, and it does mean that we are living under a system where men generally hold the power. This affects society in many different, complicated ways. In some ways, yes, it did contribute to the environment that he grew up in, which affected how he acted in his life. It's almost like systems are complicated and there are lots of contributing factors to what's going on.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Ugh Eliot Rodger followed the poisonous MRA movement to deal with his rejection from women. Ugh feminism IS NOT for men's issues. IT IS A SAFE SPACE.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
CheesyDog posted:The Gay Marriage movement is anti-heterosexual because it's not called the Equal Marriage movement. Actually this is a bad example, because the goal of the LGBT Rights movement is to make sure straights get no rights. Enjoy your Obama-assigned same sex partner with state-enforced sodomy, breeders  Oh no, have I said too much? 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:33
|
|
|
Lemming posted:So yes, that is currently the status quo, and it does mean that we are living under a system where men generally hold the power. This affects society in many different, complicated ways. In some ways, yes, it did contribute to the environment that he grew up in, which affected how he acted in his life. It's almost like systems are complicated and there are lots of contributing factors to what's going on. Unless you explain what conditions lead to the creation of the patriarchy, and why it persists, then, no, your definition means nothing other than the "status quo."
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:34
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:Because feminism is primarily about things that directly impact women. That there are men's concerns should be noted but what's way more important is things like pervasive violence against women, a culture of objectification, unequal pay, etc. So is Feminism the movement that is going to solve problems like violence directed against men, or are you saying that people concerned about violence that impacts mostly men should make its own movement? Hopefully composed of not just bitter internet males. It kind of sounds like you're shooting for the latter here.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
How utterly exceptional that this thread will be about bashing the poo poo out of feminism instead of discussing the misogyny that Elliot Rodger spent 141 pages describing as his motivation for killing people. I can't wait.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Sharkie posted:For that matter, why was MLK out there marching just for black people, huh? What did he have against white people? Man I'm tired of him and the Klan constantly whining at each other. As a rational white male, I'm above that sort of thing He didn't have anything against white people nor did he try to exclude them, and lots of white people supported him, you might even say that the civil rights movement earned broad and national support, so much in fact, that a series of federal laws was ratified in response to that movement.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:37
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Unless you explain what conditions lead to the creation of the patriarchy, and why it persists, then, no, your definition means nothing other than the "status quo." It's impressive that you managed to put a bunch of words together in a grammatically correct fashion, but this doesn't mean anything. The status quo, is indeed, a patriarchal system. Men generally have the power. You agree with me that it's the case, and then simultaneously say it's not, which is insane. Why do you think that patriarchy can't have a definition if we're living in one? Why does its particular definition matter so much to you? If it makes you feel better, you can mentally replace "patriarchy" with "our society's status quo, which is one where men generally hold the power, which affects every facet of society in complicated ways."
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
Powercrazy posted:He didn't have anything against white people nor did he try to exclude them, and lots of white people supported him, you might even say that the civil rights movement earned broad and national support, so much in fact, that a series of federal laws was ratified in response to that movement. No in fact I think "Its not my job to educate you, shitlord" is a direct MLK quote.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:39
|
|
|
This is more related to mass shootings in general, but I'm wondering why the hell does the media still plaster the face of the murderer in a mass shooting all over everywhere? Relevant clip: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PezlFNTGWv4 I think I first saw this clip from Newswipe after it got linked here in D&D after one of the many shootings that's happened in the past 5 years. Why hasn't the media done anything the psychologist in the clip is advocating? They generally listen to the recommendations on how to handle suicides but not mass shootings. It's utterly baffling that they're plastering these people's faces all over the news. It's sending a message that if you feel alone and want to be heard the most effective way to do so is kill a bunch of people. 
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:40
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:I just think the way in which they make most of their conclusions are horribly flawed. Reflexively invoking the Patriarchy for anything bad in society is incredibly intellectually lazy. I don't really see anyone doing that. Saying that a group of men being angsty over their male status and ability to have sex with attractive women that are owed to them is a result of the male-damaging aspects of patriarchy is neither radical, a big stretch, nor is it saying that anything bad is patriarchy. This is literally Feminism 101 poo poo. Patriarchy damages men by giving them unrealistic expectations and basing their social status on sexual conquest.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:41
|
|
|
axeil posted:This is more related to mass shootings in general, but I'm wondering why the hell does the media still plaster the face of the murderer in a mass shooting all over everywhere? Probably because people are interested in it. (See: this thread)
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:42
|
|
|
copper rose petal posted:How utterly exceptional that this thread will be about bashing the poo poo out of feminism instead of discussing the misogyny that Elliot Rodger spent 141 pages describing as his motivation for killing people. I can't wait. He spent the same amount of time talking about how he was jealous of men who were getting laid and killed more men too BTW
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
Ungoal posted:He spent the same amount of time talking about how he was jealous of men who were getting laid and killed more men too BTW He killed men because he was angry that women were dating them and not him. I've read the entire insufferable thing. If you think this is some sort of indictment of his motive as not being about his hatred for women, because wanting to gently caress them means you don't hate them or something, you've failed miserably.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:47
|
|
|
Ungoal posted:He spent the same amount of time talking about how he was jealous of men who were getting laid and killed more men too BTW Not to mention three of the people he killed were his gamer roommates who he killed for no reason other than finding them annoying.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:49
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:No in fact I think "Its not my job to educate you, shitlord" is a direct MLK quote. Apparently you don't know anything about feminism except what you've picked up randomly from conversations with kids on internet, so you can be forgiven for thinking Simone de Beauvoir or Gloria Steinham said the same thing. Zeitgueist posted:Saying that a group of men being angsty over their male status and ability to have sex with attractive women that are owed to them is a result of the male-damaging aspects of patriarchy is neither radical, a big stretch, nor is it saying that anything bad is patriarchy. No it's not, but for reasons related to demographics and the broader American culture copper rose petal posted:this thread will be about bashing the poo poo out of feminism instead of discussing the misogyny that Elliot Rodger spent 141 pages describing as his motivation for killing people. I can't wait.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
The GBS thread is actually better than this.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Kyrie eleison posted:Not to mention three of the people he killed were his gamer roommates who he killed for no reason other than finding them annoying. This is incorrect. He killed his roommates so that he could create a torture chamber in his apartment and lure people back to kill them. The most attractive ones he could find, because to him the most attractive people were having all the sex that he was not having.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
copper rose petal posted:How utterly exceptional that this thread will be about bashing the poo poo out of feminism instead of discussing the misogyny that Elliot Rodger spent 141 pages describing as his motivation for killing people. I can't wait. Missed this the first time it was posted.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
axeil posted:This is more related to mass shootings in general, but I'm wondering why the hell does the media still plaster the face of the murderer in a mass shooting all over everywhere? Witness the rash of copycat pressure cooker bombings in the wake of the media circus following Boston.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:53
|
|
|
Lemming posted:It's impressive that you managed to put a bunch of words together in a grammatically correct fashion, but this doesn't mean anything. The status quo, is indeed, a patriarchal system. Men generally have the power. You agree with me that it's the case, and then simultaneously say it's not, which is insane. Because without a casual chain, the idea of "patriarchy" directs us nowhere. Here's some examples of useful leftist watchwords and why they make sense: Homophobia -- Cause: most people are straight and therefore think that having sex with someone of the same sex is great. Solution: tell straight people they can be friends with gay people and not have sex with them. Their existence has no bearing on your ability to have straight sex. Racism -- Cause: historically, people grew up in more racially homogenous societies and skin color/racial features seems like it could affect personality/morality/etc. (even if it doesn't). Solution: have white people make friends with minorities. They see that the world doesn't end. Capitalism -- Cause: private ownership was a good way to fuel economic growth and break the power monopolies enjoyed by monarchs, but it involves exploitation and exacerbates inequality. Solution: show people that eliminating some private ownership and redistributing wealth can benefit society. BUT Feminism or 'Patriarchy' -- Cause: sexual dimorphism? Solution: ???; sexual selection cannot be hand-waved away and women are the only sex that can bear children, for the time being.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:54
|
|
|
EasternBronze posted:So is Feminism the movement that is going to solve problems like violence directed against men, or are you saying that people concerned about violence that impacts mostly men should make its own movement? Hopefully composed of not just bitter internet males. It kind of sounds like you're shooting for the latter here. If feminism can dismantle the Patriarchy, then yes, it will help end violence directed towards men. But I think this violence is mainly men being violent towards men. However, violence against women is a big problem world wide. I would bet that EVERY woman you know has at least ONE story about how a man touched her without her permission, frightened her on the street, or worse. Until women don't have to have a list of strategies to avoid being raped, we have a problem.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:55
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Feminism or 'Patriarchy' -- Cause: sexual dimorphism? Solution: ???; sexual selection cannot be hand-waved away and women are the only sex that can bear children, for the time being. Yeah, feminism is the helpless realization that women being able to bear children justifies a huge range of societal wrongs against women such as reduced wages, (previously) the inability to vote, constant harassment, threats of rape, etc.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
Slobjob Zizek posted:Feminism or 'Patriarchy' -- Cause: sexual dimorphism? Solution: ???; sexual selection cannot be hand-waved away and women are the only sex that can bear children, for the time being.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:56
|
|
|
chaos rhames posted:The GBS thread is actually better than this. This thread is beta as gently caress in comparison
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 08:31 |
|
|
copper rose petal posted:This is incorrect. He killed his roommates so that he could create a torture chamber in his apartment and lure people back to kill them. The most attractive ones he could find, because to him the most attractive people were having all the sex that he was not having. He wrote saying that was his intention, but he didn't do it. He also wrote this about his roommates: quote:Two new housemates moved into my apartment for the Autumn semester. They were two foreign Asian students who attended UCSB. These were the biggest nerds I had ever seen, and they were both very ugly with annoying voices. My last two housemates, Chris and Jon, were nerds as well, but at least they were friendly and pleasant. These two new ones were utterly repulsive, and one of them had a very rebellious demeanor about him. He went out of his way to start arguments with me whenever I raised the issue of the noise he made. Hell, even living with Spencer was more pleasant than these two idiots. I knew that when the Day of Retribution came, I would have to kill my housemates to get them out of the way. If they were pleasant to live with, I would regret having to kill them, but due to their behavior I now had no regrets about such a prospect. In fact, I’d even enjoy stabbing them both to death while they slept. Sound like ladies men to you?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2014 00:57
|
|