Author Topic: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!  (Read 63631 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #225 on: July 06, 2014, 05:33:47 AM »
0
I do not deny what you say about that man, however this is just example to illustrate behavior, not to blame someone for what happened. I completely agree to what you say about that person. He is strongly biased, but this is common problem for all media, because everyone will list only facts they like and you must listen to different people to make whole image.


I am asking to provide example of opposite thing where feminists actually did something besides crying, for example castrating the man who poured acid on a woman or protecting their fellows from assault or starting some successful company which employs women into important positions and successfully competes with companies successfully created and ruled by men or overthrowing government something what really makes change.

QuestEon

  • Just some guy with a blog.
  • Administrator
  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 868
  • What's your opinion? I'd love to hear it!
  • Respect: +463
    • FDR Liberated
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #226 on: July 06, 2014, 11:12:09 AM »
0

I think my comment was completely reasonable and based on evidence. Also it is not directed towards anyone here in personal.

If someone think that I am wrong they can provide any appropriate evidence to prove that feminists actually did something besides things I mentioned.

The great and terrible privilege of running a forum is that I don't need anyone's proof or evidence for how I moderate it. I need only to lay out my expectations for tone and behavior and decide what to do when people reject them.

As a libertarian, I'm deeply committed to freedom of speech but the abusive and toxic language that has emerged during these "I hate wimminz/I hate menz" threads has seriously put that to the test. It has caused me to moderate posts for the first time since this forum began. Now I'm being forced to consider if I need to move to bannings or account suspensions as the next step. You have no idea how much this goes against my philosophy; it's very challenging.

I've already had to remove the "Recent Posts" box on this forum's landing page because it was creating the illusion that this forum has been completely overrun by low-quality discussions about gender relations. That has never been what this forum is about. This forum is about very high-quality analysis of Stefan Molyneux and the business enterprise known as Freedomain Radio. Its main function is to serve as a lighthouse that can guide people through the treacherous waters of relentless Molyneux self-promotion. 

Of course, there is significant freedom to talk about anything else that comes to mind. I encourage it. But even when the conversation does go elsewhere, if there is analysis involved, I still expect it to be one where people are respected while ideas are exchanged.

I am very interested in Molyneux's current venture into misogyny, so I think reasonable, objective analysis of feminism, MRM, MGTOW, AVfM, etc., is more than appropriate. I'm less interested in their actual promotion, but I don't plan on drawing a line as long as everyone keeps it cool.

From where I sit, I don't really have a whole lot of hope for your future here. Whatever you think of feminists, it is empirically true that it is a belief set of widely divergent viewpoints and definitions. It's made up of a vast number of people ranging from not-so-bright to genius, all with different goals, objectives, philosophies, politics, and moral standards. It has spanned decades. Given such an extreme set of characteristics, those are about the only general things one can say about feminism.

I'm not saying it's wrong or right, good or bad. It's simply saying that the above facts are empirically true to any rational human being. For example, even though I'm an atheist I'd say the same above things about Christianity (except it has spanned centuries). While I can clearly see the lunacy of some fundamentalists, I have the highest respect for Christianity's deepest thinkers (who may be smarter than me in so many ways, even though I disagree with them on their faith). You, on the other hand, have already claimed to be smarter than any religious person who has ever lived.

Now you have summed up all of feminism with this dismissive, abusive and vaguely slut shame-y phrase: "feminists can only cry and show their titties." Worse, you believe that line is "completely reasonable and based on evidence." It isn't the first time you've said something like this--but it was the straw that broke the camel's back.

As I've said too many times elsewhere, I've been really busy in my real life and lately haven't had time to participate in FDRLiberated as much as I should. So, I'm not responding to you to kick off a long and protracted discussion in which you refuse to see the point. That's not going to happen. I'm trying to be as clear as I can now, so that if you remain unable to raise the quality of your arguments above unsupportable generalities laced with abusive vulgarity there will be no confusion as to why I've suspended your account, should I need to.


« Last Edit: July 06, 2014, 12:10:22 PM by QuestEon »
It isn't about winning the debate. It's about the truth.

Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #227 on: July 06, 2014, 01:21:32 PM »
0
For the record QuestEon I don't think anyone here has said that they hate men, I certainly don't argue it.

I have read and I acknowledge your rules  :) -- of course if anyone feels like I'm too rude, please feel free to correct me.
Keep Calm And Disobey

Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #228 on: July 07, 2014, 11:56:40 PM »
0
I can't resist ;D...

I am asking to provide example of opposite thing where feminists actually did something


Omega keeps implying that women and feminists do nothing, men do everything. ::) This is very a common refrain among habitants of the manosphere, according to my research.

I feel that the following statement encapsulates quite well this very common, silly attitude: "we hunted the mammoth to feed you"!
Keep Calm And Disobey

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #229 on: July 08, 2014, 05:56:41 AM »
0
I can't resist ;D...

I am asking to provide example of opposite thing where feminists actually did something


Omega keeps implying that women and feminists do nothing, men do everything. ::) This is very a common refrain among habitants of the manosphere, according to my research.

I feel that the following statement encapsulates quite well this very common, silly attitude: "we hunted the mammoth to feed you"!


First I do not say that "women do nothing" I said "feminists do nothing".
And in contrast to that article what I meant has nothing to do with being grateful.
it is simply about achieving what you want on your own.
You declare to be independent how about proving that with actions?

You always portray yourself being oppressed by patriarchy monster but you do not actually fight that monster yourself you want government to defeat it for you.


Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #230 on: July 09, 2014, 02:58:14 AM »
0
I can't believe I am still responding to Omega but he consistently churns out delicious misinformation that I would like readers to know about. And since this is very relevant to the thread topic and has been said a few times before, no, it is not as simple as 'feminists are relying on the daddy state to get things done for them'.

First of all, it is lauded that the only way to get anything done politically in any country on this planet, if it is even possible, is to participate in the political system, going through the 'proper channels' such as voting, lobbying, petitioning, calling your representative, joining a political party, participating in campaigns, forming a political party, or running for office. Another thing you can do is gain influence in the economy and exploit that for political ends, and one such way is sitting on the advisory board in your industry to think of ways to change public opinion through clever marketing, such as persuading men to wear makeup (a new source of profit) by playing upon their insecurities, but I digress. If you're for any state at all, then you will most likely have no problem with such participation in mainstream politics, and will be encouraged to participate yourself to further your own political ends. Naturally a statist believes this is the way to go, and if you don't participate then you have nothing to complain about.

Secondly, if you are not a statist then you recognize the state as an oppressive institution by its very nature.

As such, I don't blame feminists for doing what everyone (everyone, even raw milk enthusiasts) is doing to traverse the political landscape. It doesn't reflect on their philosophy because feminism doesn't necessitate a state: the state as the ultimate gatekeeper necessitates that everyone go through it.
Keep Calm And Disobey

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #231 on: July 09, 2014, 08:46:58 AM »
0
Quote
If you're for any state at all, then you will most likely have no problem with such participation in mainstream politics, and will be encouraged to participate yourself to further your own political ends. Naturally a statist believes this is the way to go, and if you don't participate then you have nothing to complain about.

politic is crap, all those politicians are nothing more than puppets
economy is what matters if someone found a way to monetize cannibalism to make serious money I can bet government will immediately make it legal to grind children into sausages.
Government has no empathy or morality their only care is economy how to get more money from their resources.
It does not matter what people want to or think everything evolves in a way to suit economy and nobody can change it.
If you want to influence society you must influence economy.

Quote
Secondly, if you are not a statist then you recognize the state as an oppressive institution by its very nature.

So who if not state is going to pay for birth control who will protect you from rapists and generic criminals? Who will take care of orphans?
without state feminism could not even exist because it would be exterminated by evolution:

Man is relatively free to do whatever he like and he is pretty much invincible.
Typical woman on the other hand has no freedom, if she has children she must support them, she cant go to fight and risk her life she cant take any significant risks that can destroy her financial stability. She is extremely vulnerable because anyone can attack her children and no mater how strong is that woman herself she will be defeated without fight.
all those facts shape mind of men and women.

Quote
feminism doesn't necessitate a state: the state as the ultimate gatekeeper necessitates that everyone go through it.

how is that different from Stefan's nonsense who believes that if only women would stop beating their children violence would stop exist on earth by itself?
in fact feminism is all about state excursively, it is about laws and enforcing them.

Aslo some words on PUA.
All links provides prove exactly what i say:
every one of then declares PUA as dangerous social engineering.  with lots of emphasis on improper use to take away free will from women.
that fact alone proves that PUA is highly effective or if it was ineffective there would be no dangers. As far as I see nobody really questions efficiency of PUA methods.

Argent

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
  • Respect: +83
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #232 on: July 09, 2014, 10:41:42 AM »
0
without state feminism could not even exist because it would be exterminated by evolution:

Man is relatively free to do whatever he like and he is pretty much invincible.
Typical woman on the other hand has no freedom, if she has children she must support them, she cant go to fight and risk her life she cant take any significant risks that can destroy her financial stability. She is extremely vulnerable because anyone can attack her children and no mater how strong is that woman herself she will be defeated without fight.
all those facts shape mind of men and women.

Here is what I am getting from your post. Let me know if I'm off track.
  • Without the state, men were free, because they are strong and can't be held back by pregnancy or children.
  • With the state, men are less free, because they have to give a portion of their money to birth control, child support, daycare, etc. Or they're forced to sign up for the army, to protect the weaker members of their country (women and children).
  • Without the state, women were not free, because they are typically weaker and can get held back by pregnancy and children.
  • With the state, women are more free, because they can get free birth control, or if they have kids, they can get the state to get them money from men for child support, daycare, etc. They can also rely on the state for physical protection.
  • Therefore, states are in the best interest of women, but not in the best interest of men.
Did I capture your perspective?

Argent

  • FDR Wizard
  • *****
  • Posts: 602
  • Respect: +83
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #233 on: July 09, 2014, 11:21:16 AM »
0
Now, the reason I disagree with what I wrote above is its very framing. Men vs. women. State of nature vs. modern socialist times.

First of all, there is not a hard split between men and women. They are not two warring tribes that exist independently of each other but battle for resources. In reality, men come from women (sons), and women come from men (daughters). Men tend to have more masculine characteristics and women tend to have more feminine characteristics, but everybody has a mix of both. Some of those characteristics are genetic, but others are socialized (i.e. we teach males to behave one way, and females to behave another way).

Second, the characterization of the state is very simplistic. The state does more than take money from men and give it to women. It does lots of things that benefit men as well as women. A cynical person (sometimes including me) would say it also does lots of things that harm both common men and common women, for the benefit of the elite.

Third, the heavy reliance on evolutionary psychology. Check out wikipedia to see how contentious it is.

When you start with black-and-white or overly simplistic premises that don't reflect reality, you end up with conclusions that are misguided or just wrong.

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #234 on: July 09, 2014, 02:50:35 PM »
0
Quote
Here is what I am getting from your post. Let me know if I'm off track.
Purpose of that my statement was different I was talking about feminists not about women.
and I meant that state is required to enforce feminist demands.

I did not thought about things you wrote in my post,  women should benefit from some aspects of state state more than men if state is socialistic but those are benefits of socialism not benefits of state.
I am noticing that term "socialism" and term "state" are becoming synonymous, but is socialism cannot exist without state, state can perfectly exist without socialism.

Quote
First of all, there is not a hard split between men and women. They are not two warring tribes that exist independently of each other but battle for resources. In reality, men come from women (sons), and women come from men (daughters). Men tend to have more masculine characteristics and women tend to have more feminine characteristics, but everybody has a mix of both. Some of those characteristics are genetic, but others are socialized (i.e. we teach males to behave one way, and females to behave another way).

Unfortunately they are almost different species
even if everything is almost same, everything is expressed in very different amounts.
even brain sizes and structures are different.  it is not same if we I have 10% x and 90% y and you have 90% x and 10% y.
Of course, because of our plasticity, it is possible to socialize female as male, but they will perform poorly under typical roles, or they will feel unhappy.
You must utilize most expressed feature to be happy and successful.

Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #235 on: July 09, 2014, 06:04:45 PM »
0
socialism cannot exist without state, state can perfectly exist without socialism.[/i]

Another amusing myth. I am a libertarian socialist; your argument is invalid.
Keep Calm And Disobey

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #236 on: July 09, 2014, 09:07:40 PM »
0
socialism cannot exist without state, state can perfectly exist without socialism.[/i]

Another amusing myth. I am a libertarian socialist; your argument is invalid.

libertarian socialist, oxymoron, these things are opposite to each other.
you have no clue what you believe

If you think it is possible who will pay for all social programs? maybe money is going to fall from the sky?

Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #237 on: July 10, 2014, 03:49:46 AM »
0
socialism cannot exist without state, state can perfectly exist without socialism.[/i]

Another amusing myth. I am a libertarian socialist; your argument is invalid.

libertarian socialist, oxymoron, these things are opposite to each other.
you have no clue what you believe

If you think it is possible who will pay for all social programs? maybe money is going to fall from the sky?

Ignorance is not an argument good sir
Keep Calm And Disobey

Omega

  • Banned
  • FDR Authority
  • *
  • Posts: 374
  • Respect: 0
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #238 on: July 10, 2014, 04:30:36 AM »
0
Ignorance is not an argument good sir
Your delusions are not good argument either

Lee Li

  • Libertarian Socialist
  • FDR Enlightened
  • ***
  • Posts: 183
  • Respect: +2
Re: But Feminists ARE Socialists with panties!
« Reply #239 on: July 10, 2014, 04:32:27 AM »
0
Ignorance is not an argument good sir
Your delusions are not good argument either

Says the guy who has no idea what a lib soc is. Are we going to keep going in circles or are you going to crack open a book?

Pretense of knowledge will not add anything to this forum's quality. I feel as though we are diminishing it by the second. I'd rather you went back to /b/.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 04:39:56 AM by Lee Li »
Keep Calm And Disobey