[mikema63]

I look forward to a world were women know their place, and it's in chains.

[Igor Antunov]

1st wave feminism: 'equal rights, opportunities bla bla = got

2nd wave feminism: 'our womb is our prison, special privileges to account for downsides of having womb = got

3rd wave feminism: 'kill all men! all men are rapists, video games cause rape, Feminize all boys! Patriarchy causes war!' = some fields are infested with this extremist rhetoric and changes applying to it, eg some tertiary institutions, social media platforms, etc.

3 is where I draw the line. Not an Obama line, a Putin line.

[Syph]

3rd wave feminism: 'kill all men! all men are rapists, video games cause rape, Feminize all boys! Patriarchy causes war!'

This is the image of feminism presented by the internet. It's a strawman to distract from the real problems women face in the Western world. As always there is a grain of truth in each of those claims.

kill all men!

Extremist feminists sometimes take this position. They are largely ridiculed by most feminists in the same way MRAs are ridiculed by everyone else.

all men are rapists - all men can rape

You can't really dodge the reality that the overwhelming majority of men have the capacity to rape the majority of women. This is a biological difference between the sexes that can't be easily reversed.

Men don't understand the extraordinary bravery that it takes for a woman to agree to go on a date with a man. At worst, her date could rape and murder her. In between, he could harass her, stalk her and bully her. These are very real threats to a woman's safety posed by men. Society doesn't defend rape victims, it blames them for wearing a short skirt, it blames them for leading men on.

I could go on, but men can't really conceptualise the dangerous reality that women live in even in the Western world. Hence, male priviledge, where a man can walk home alone at night without fear of consequence.

Feminize all boys! - Detoxify masculine gender roles

Masculinity is in bad shape due to the progress of feminism. For the last 40 years, women can support themselves without a wealthy husband. The male identity has been attacked and it's overwhelming privileges have been curtailed. All that remains is the bravado, the senseless violence, the bullying passed off as friendship. What's amusing is that after all the progress of feminism, men still desire the adoration of higher status males. It defines what they wear, what hobbies they do, what women they sleep with.

Men can be masculine without being dickheads. Masculinity is about being a good man: looking after others, taking care of oneself, lifelong learning, respect. The toxic aspects of masculinity: violence, bullying and domineering should be aggressively eradicated. They are not representative of men, they are representative of bad people.

Patriarchy causes war! - equal representation of women in positions of power

The representation of women in positions of power would diversify opinion within male-dominated spheres. Ego and bravado stemming from toxic behaviours must have an influence in aggressive decisions.

[James Sonny Crockett]

Feminists are the general hypocritical and frustrated bitches.
They see the disparities between men and women only when inequality is not in their favor.
If they somehow, somewhere can get in for free because they are a woman, you do not hear them. They then think it is normal, because they happen to be women.
And she is far worse than that.

[Syph]

They see the disparities between men and women only when inequality is not in their favor.

Firstly, this isn't true. Secondly, there are a number of reasons why feminist prioritise women's issues:

1. Women are a historically oppressed group since the genesis of agriculture. They were considered property less than 200 years ago.
2. Our culture promotes a problematic view of women as part-object part-person.
3. Most issues raised by MRAs don't make a lot of sense.

[James Sonny Crockett]

Firstly, this isn't true. Secondly, there are a number of reasons why feminist prioritise women's issues:

1. Women are a historically oppressed group since the genesis of agriculture. They were considered property less than 200 years ago.
2. Our culture promotes a problematic view of women as part-object part-person.
3. Most issues raised by MRAs don't make a lot of sense.

There is a difference between feminists and women who stand up for their rights.
Regarding to women who stand up for their rights, I can only say that I support them completely.

Women should be paid as well as men. Women should have the same rights as men, no exception.

However, as for feminists, I don't change a word about what I said.

[Syph]

There is a difference between feminists and women who stand up for their rights.
Regarding to women who stand up for their rights, I can only say that I support them completely.

You are making a distinction where none exists. Why only lend your support to "feminists in all but name" yet vilify those who choose to self-identify as such?

As with all things the most extreme 0.1% of a group get most of the news coverage. The majority of feminists are moderate, sex-positive people.

[James Sonny Crockett]

You are making a distinction where none exists. Why only lend your support to "feminists in all but name" yet vilify those who choose to self-identify as such?

As with all things the most extreme 0.1% of a group get most of the news coverage. The majority of feminists are moderate, sex-positive people.

There is definitely a difference.

Women who stand up for their rights (and I am the last to blame them. I do say that they have every reason) are not of the kind Anita Sarkeesian.
Women who stand up for their rights, generally understand that if (for example: a job interview) a choice must be made between a man and a woman, the one with the better profile will get the job.

Feminists do not understand that. They think that because they are women, they should have that job. If they don't (because that man had a better profile) they immediately speak of inequality.

I compare it a bit with the white-black debate: If a white man/woman applies for the same job as where a black man/woman applies for.
According to me, the job should go to the one who has the better profile. I don't care at all who it is. Woman, Man, Black, White, Yellow, ...
If the job goes to a white man/woman, it is generally understood that the white man/woman was the better profile. However, here and there, there are still people who then gladly take the word racism in the mouth.


I have no problem with black/yellow/brown men/women that stand up for their rights. No, not at all! I support them.
I have no problem with women that stand up for their rights. No, not at all! I support them.

I don't like feminists.
I don't like black/yellow/brown men/women that abuse the term racism.

[Syph]

Women who stand up for their rights, generally understand that if (for example: a job interview) a choice must be made between a man and a woman, the one with the better profile will get the job.

Most feminists want this. The reality of the situation is that employers will always hire a man over a woman because of the pregnancy factor despite equal qualification. To correct this situation, incentives for companies to hire female staff are acceptable.

According to me, the job should go to the one who has the better profile. I don't care at all who it is. Woman, Man, Black, White, Yellow, ...

You come from a place of good intentions but research (Pager, 2007) suggests that a white man is 3.3x more likely to get a job than a black man with the same qualifications.

It is racism, not conscious or intentional, but it is still discrimination along racial lines. They are not using the term inappropriately at all. There are real injustices with huge implications on people lives. Black Lives Matter targets this specific type of profiling by the police in the US.

[Albert]

Make women my property again!

#patriarchyrules

[James Sonny Crockett]

Make women my property again!

#patriarchyrules

[The Sabbaticus]

I'm wary of drawing considerable flames onto this thread given the antifeminist sentiment of the internet at the moment.

There is a lot of unfair vitriol thrown at Sarkeesian from people who have no understanding of the goals of the next wave of feminists. I don't for a second believe that videogames make us more sexist but the current market of videogames does nothing to challenge the problems faced by women. Not to mention the toxicity of online gaming spaces.

Watch both videos, in it you'll see that the 'problems faced by women' are currently at the absolute lowest point in recorded history. Sarkeesian is a Fourth Wave feminist, by the way. Fourth Wave feminists are outrage feminists who use slacktivism internet platforms (twitter/youtube) to mob people into submission through doxing and such.

[Rancid]

Edit: WRong thread.

[Harmattan]

Men can be masculine without being dickheads. Masculinity is about being a good man: looking after others, taking care of oneself, lifelong learning, respect. The toxic aspects of masculinity: violence, bullying and domineering should be aggressively eradicated. They are not representative of men, they are representative of bad people.

Who decided that? You?

The commonly accepted masculine values are power, strength, wealth, intelligence, feminine conquests and seeds dissemination. Which is why women are attracted by those features. They may choose caring partners, but they cheat on them with uncaring lovers.


As men are asked to care more about women, to become caring fathers, to share household chores and such, many decide in reaction to not form couples. Which is perfectly logical: there is no reason for us to bother with this. Women have to educate children and therefore need help, but it is easier for us to just spread seeds.

Yes it is unfair, yes their womb is their doom, yes we have the easy role, and I feel sorry for them. But nature always follow the easiest path, and for men it is not about childcare and household chores. Sexual relationships = yes, couple = no. I think more and more people are realizing this.

[Syph]

Watch both videos, in it you'll see that the 'problems faced by women' are currently at the absolute lowest point in recorded history.

How much sexism is an acceptable amount? The only answer is to dream it can be completely eradicated.

I've tried to elucidate the main problems with our culture in this post above and justify the subject matter of Sarkeesian's analyses. Gaming is the last frontier of the Old Boys Club and women want a piece, their desires should shape the market as well. There will always be "hardcore" gamers and "hardcore" games, it's just at the moment they are hugely over-represented in term of budget and number of titles released per annum.

[The Sabbaticus]

You must be joking.

Men can be masculine without being dickheads. Masculinity is about being a good man: looking after others, taking care of oneself, lifelong learning, respect. The toxic aspects of masculinity: violence, bullying and domineering should be aggressively eradicated. They are not representative of men, they are representative of bad people.

Ask any girl how vicious their female teenage counterparts are, including violence, pestering, intimidation, domineering conduct (bossing others around), humiliating those they see as inferior and driving other girls to commit suicide. Your rose tinted glasses appear to skip a dimension.

The representation of women in positions of power would diversify opinion within male-dominated spheres. Ego and bravado stemming from toxic behaviours must have an influence in aggressive decisions.

These vile feminist caricatures that you see slithering about now-a-days are not just the latest trend, they've been seen throughout history. Why do you think the concept of a 'harpy' exists? Greek mythology is rife with monstrous female creatures.

[Syph]

Who decided that? You?

I don't claim to be an authority at all. I'm simply suggesting a path through which masculinity can grow.

The commonly accepted masculine values are power, strength, wealth, intelligence, feminine conquests and seeds dissemination.

These values were relevant in a bygone era where women were an oppressed class. None of the first four traits are specific to maleness.

Which is why women are attracted by those features. They may choose caring partners, but they cheat on them with uncaring lovers.

Women are people, not a homogeneous borg. It's sweeping statements like these that I find curious, given we know that some women aren't attracted to men at all. Infidelity happens for many reasons including the "Nice Guy" you imply . Some people aren't monogamous at all.

If men treated women as individuals with their own agency then they would get a lot more action.

As men are asked to care more about women, to become caring fathers, to share household chores and such, many decide in reaction to not form couples.

As is their choice. Many men are actually invested in their children and not deadbeat dads.

Sexual relationships = yes, couple = no. I think more and more people are realizing this.

Sex without emotional connection is an empty endeavour. Many men need intimacy more than they need sex. It is far easier to achieve with some form of long term relationship whatever shape that may take.

[Syph]

Ask any girl how vicious their female teenage counterparts are, including violence, pestering, intimidation, domineering conduct (bossing others around), humiliating those they see as inferior and driving other girls to commit suicide. Your rose tinted glasses appear to skip a dimension.

I never said these traits were exclusively masculine. They are exclusively toxic and found in both genders. However, whereas women are often derided as "bitches" if they engage in such behaviour, men are considered "alpha".

These vile feminist caricatures that you see slithering about now-a-days are not just the latest trend, they've been seen throughout history. Why do you think the concept of a 'harpy' exists? Greek mythology is rife with monstrous female creatures.

I can't really see the relevance of this bile. Less testosterone in positions of power would diversify opinion leading to innovation of outside-the-box thinking.

[The Sabbaticus]

You sound like feminist pamphlet. 'Diversify opinion', 'less testosterone', 'innovation', 'outside-the-box thinking'. Do any of these terms even have a meaning outside of the world of feminism? A corresponding effect in reality? Women are just as venal, underhanded and competitive as men.

[Igor Antunov]

This sums up 3rd wave feminism very well:



This is the extent and consistency of their 'activism' in the developed world, alongside campus witch hunts. Which is sad given how many women actually need help elsewhere. Yet these same 3rd wavers PROTECT actual rape cultures to the detriment of those women that still require suffrage/emancipation. See recent events in Germany.

This is a regressive self serving group that must be eradicated.