The reason I don't like radical feminists

[Pekka]

.... simply because they are walking paradoxes.

I'm all for equal rights, equal opportunity. Gender shouldn't play a part where the man gets the job because the society favors men, more so because men are usually the ones with more powerful positions, so they will more likely choose other men into positions of power. A cycle of a kind.

While this is true, that men have been more powerful and while it is true that there has been a glass ceiling for women in the past and in some places they still exists, and I'm talking about western societies and women... feminism tries to do exactly what?

I think that it has got nothing to do with equal rights. We are protected by the law already. In more conservative feminism this might be the case. However, women who are into this whole raging thing, where men are evil, where men do this and that are doing exactly the thing they are against. That is stereotyping men and by doing that they're assuming men have certain roles in the society.

While trying to break free from roles that women have taken and take, by claiming that the society makes you take those roles, in it's nature that is oppressive and some kind of a man conspiracy.

Well let me tell you radical femmies, I haven't recieved the memo. I haven't been invited to the secret meeting behind in the big garage, where I'm told to hire men only. I'm not there to demand certain roles for women either. So what they REALLY want to do is liberate themselves. It's nothing more than a natural thing for people, to idea of being free, to not conform, to be an individual and demand those rights of individuals. And while doing it, making "the other side" look bad and the reason for it. Well, if someone is "liberated" and accuses me of man conspiracy, it's a bit problematic. I'll take that person as an individual, but if I'm not an individual myself in this same event... if I'm being given roles, that's just not going to cut it.

SO, radical femmies are stupid basically, walking contradictions. And usually there's a big need to compensate, a big need to "be as good as a man", showing that "we don't need men". So they're fixing their cars because that's what a man would do, again assuming roles, and it's just ironic really. OF course a big part of it is to rain down on women who aren't into their ideologies, as the ones who conform, the traitors, the oppressed ones.

So they're just a group of obnoxious people really. So, it's the fault of the society, it's the fault of men who dominate the society etc etc. Sexuality, especially male sexuality is disgusting etc.

So as long as some radical feminist is able to say that I'm a bastard, thinking with my penis and oppressing their rights and just dominating this society, I have all the moral rights to say she's a smelly lesbian who just hasn't met the right guy yet and is angry because she is sexually frustrated. Oh and a whore a well.

Yes. This is my right. Except I'm only attacking that smelly individual there, other than that, I loooove women. They're sweet stuff. They smell nice. They're pretty. They can make me happy. Nothing wrong with that. You can go ahead and NOT take that role all day long, in fact my car needs a fixing, so come on here and shwo you have a bigger penis than I do and fix it!

[Arrian]

You and aneeshm can have a big "bash the feminazis" party. It'll be great.

-Arrian

[Aeson]

.... simply because they are walking paradoxes.

This is true of all women. Just some do it in different ways.

(Disclaimer: I know nothing of women.)

[Lancer]

Rad fems aren't that bad, they're worse.

[Imran Siddiqui]

wtf pekka?

[Pekka]

Nah. THis is not an ongoing theme for me. I've just been "liberated" from a group of feminists myself. Had to work with a group of them. It was all getting back to the society, getting back to men. I could feel I was the man in those situations.

The ratio for gender was like 3 males and 13 women, seriously. So when I was usually th eonly man with say, 6 women, don't talk **** about glass ceiling in our place, because there's more women to begin with in these same positions!

And they would hire ONLY other women. That's a fact.

What an experience that was. I was just trying to be nice and professional. To me gender wasn't an issue. To them, it definitely was. But they also had the power. They were very liberated alright. But their liberation meant that while their theme was always very feminist, my theme would have to discard race or agree with their views.

Which I often didn't. Kept my mouth shut.

[Pekka]

Not to mention the bigger conflicts. Often femmies demand that society takes special considerations because of their sex. This means, that a man shouldn't benefit if the woman is pregnant, meaning that a man works more during that time, so he makes more money, even though that's usually seen as household economy, not "the man's money". The man's money pays for things that the household needs, yes?

SO, that's unfair. OK, I understand the point, however, if you hate the "woman role", you are an "individual" and "liberated", don't come asking for extra benefits from that old woman role then. They're gone now. GO FIX MY CAR.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Pekka
Nah. THis is not an ongoing theme for me. I've just been "liberated" from a group of feminists myself. Had to work with a group of them. It was all getting back to the society, getting back to men. I could feel I was the man in those situations.

The ratio for gender was like 3 males and 13 women, seriously. So when I was usually th eonly man with say, 6 women, don't talk **** about glass ceiling in our place, because there's more women to begin with in these same positions!

I work for two women but I wouldn't consider either to be a "radical feminist". They are both strong, focused and determined but gender isn't their thing.

Our entire staff consists of 8 people - 5 women and 3 men. The "senior" three positions under the female co-owners are all filled by men.

[Pekka]

And it's not that the roles assumed by the society would be a thing with negative or positive value to me, a distinct split, either or kind of situation.

For example, what attracts me most is if a woman is a real woman. You guys know what I mean. Here's something for you femmies, it doesn't mean that she dresses up like a prostitute! It's the self confidence. It's not to act like a slut, it is to be sensual and kind of mysterious even. THAT is HOT stuff!! And we can't "demand it", since when we demand, if we get to sketch it out for you, it looks like prostitutes. Because we can't even begin to trace the features and how that really real woman would be like. It is mystery to us, except that we know it makes our minds weak and rational thoughts gone. The difference also is, that they want to appeal to you and show you what it's all about. Seduction and all that. Femmies wouldn't know **** about that, they missed that class.

Just like men try to appeal to women. THey think what the women will like, but they often get it wrong. Men often think it's about some macho thing, you know, and they end up looking ridiculous, with an attitude of a little boy. That's if we try to think what you want. BUt that isn't often the case either. But men can be that counterpart, the real man thing and thsi doesn't mean macho. But real man thing can be done and it is appealing to women as well and that's what we want to do.

Or men appealing to men, women appealing to women, whatever, some pervert trying to appeal to a sheep with a rope and a taser gun.

[Shrapnel12]

Pekka this is true about all liberal groups now. Civil Rights isn't about equal right. Not anymore. They are not satified with equal rights. Now it's all about getting as much power as they can. It's the political leaders really trying to creae a purpose for themselves where there isn't one anymore.

[Pekka]

Wezil, and neither would I make that assumption either if it indeed wasn't the case. I should be fair though, two (2) were self proclaimed feminists. As in what's that got to do with anything? ANd they weren't the moderate types either. They were straight out man haters. I've never felt so uncomfortable with women as I felt there.

[Wezil]

One of my bosses is a "real woman".

[Pekka]

shraplen, it is about power. You ask from radical femmie, "what do you want?" "equal rights!" "Ok you have them already, I can't change other peoples attitudes but at least the law doesn't favour men, so what you want?". The real answer is "everything".

It's about power.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Pekka
Wezil, and neither would I make that assumption either if it indeed wasn't the case. I should be fair though, two (2) were self proclaimed feminists. As in what's that got to do with anything? ANd they weren't the moderate types either. They were straight out man haters. I've never felt so uncomfortable with women as I felt there.

I know what you mean. I had a housemate in uni that was a self procliamed feminist of the sort you would consider "radical". Quite frankly, she was a complete and utter headcase.

[Pekka]

wezil, exactly. When I talk about real woman, I talk about someone who knows herself. SOmeone who is proud to be herself, what ever it is. Raedical femmies don't know themselves, they're a blank canvas after being liberated or something, that's what they might think.

But real women are often strong. So it's not the strength that would be something that I don't like. On the contrary, I need to be disciplined. I've been a bad boy.