Feminism gone wrong Thread

Jay/Cris wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jay/Cris wrote:

wankwankwank

wankwankwank

wankwankwank

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jay/Cris wrote:

wankwankwank

wankwankwank

wankwankwank

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Jay/Cris wrote:

Nigga, what? You have quite the balls on you - wait, is that politically incorrect as well? - to tell me off on calling someone a bitch when you inspired the board-title 'shitgobbling pissdrinker' and have been cussing a streak since forever - oh, I'm sorry, you've quit doing that, haven't you? That makes it far less hypocritical, I suppose.
Anyway. Fine. You've inspired me to change my wicked ways: from now on, I will not be guided by gender when I'm calling someone names. Instead, I will use gender-neutral terms like fuckwit and imbecile. Oh, better yet: how about I call everyone a bitch, never mind their actual sex? That oughta improve my general political correctness, don'tcha think?

I've been noticing lately that you're a bit of a dumbass.
Cyber, if anything, has proved that you can be just as fantastically offensive towards someone without taking cheap shots at their gender, race or physical/mental capabilities. She's not arguing against cursing in general, she's arguing against using insults that debase people for the groups they're associated with. Calling someone a bitch does this; calling someone a shitgobbling pissdrinker does not.

But keep on feeling oppressed because you feel like people are judging you for being too lazy to come up with your own insults. We'll be over here continuing to shake our heads at you.

Jay/Cris wrote:

Nigga, what? You have quite the balls on you - wait, is that politically incorrect as well? - to tell me off on calling someone a bitch when you inspired the board-title 'shitgobbling pissdrinker' and have been cussing a streak since forever - oh, I'm sorry, you've quit doing that, haven't you? That makes it far less hypocritical, I suppose.
Anyway. Fine. You've inspired me to change my wicked ways: from now on, I will not be guided by gender when I'm calling someone names. Instead, I will use gender-neutral terms like fuckwit and imbecile. Oh, better yet: how about I call everyone a bitch, never mind their actual sex? That oughta improve my general political correctness, don'tcha think?

Yeah, this right here? Proves my point about you being lazy - and maybe, just maybe, loving how certain slurs roll off your tongue so much that you don't think about how they degrade entire groups of people, not just the individual you're swearing at.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jay/Cris wrote:

Nigga, what? You have quite the balls on you - wait, is that politically incorrect as well? - to tell me off on calling someone a bitch when you inspired the board-title 'shitgobbling pissdrinker' and have been cussing a streak since forever - oh, I'm sorry, you've quit doing that, haven't you? That makes it far less hypocritical, I suppose.
Anyway. Fine. You've inspired me to change my wicked ways: from now on, I will not be guided by gender when I'm calling someone names. Instead, I will use gender-neutral terms like fuckwit and imbecile. Oh, better yet: how about I call everyone a bitch, never mind their actual sex? That oughta improve my general political correctness, don'tcha think?

Yeah, this right here? Proves my point about you being lazy - and maybe, just maybe, loving how certain slurs roll off your tongue so much that you don't think about how they degrade entire groups of people, not just the individual you're swearing at.

Disregarding the implication that I, apparently, use slurs all the time, I am forced to admit that you did, actually, have a point when you jumped me for using the word bitch - although, how using 'bitch' completely invalidates the examples I gave and the actual point I made is beyond me.
Anyway, I´d like to apologize for using that word, and the word nigga.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jay/Cris wrote:

Because it´s always a better alternative to rid every human product of anything that might, potentially, some day, be offensive to someone

Sounds to me like you're complaining about what hard work that might be OR you don't care if some things are sexist/racist/homophobic/etc.

Sounds to me like once again you've gotten up on your high horse to preach from on high about trivial bullshit so you can feel like you're important/good for something.

Jay/Cris wrote:

Disregarding the implication that I, apparently, use slurs all the time, I am forced to admit that you did, actually, have a point when you jumped me for using the word bitch - although, how using 'bitch' completely invalidates the examples I gave and the actual point I made is beyond me.
Anyway, I´d like to apologize for using that word, and the word nigga.

I shouldn't have implied you use slurs all the time, either. I have to disagree on the examples you gave, though. The origins of Jewcookie (since you don't really dispute the Nigra example) may be innocent enough, but if it makes Jewish people uncomfortable and reminds them of other, less innocent things and forms of prejudice, why not change it? A jam company in Britain had to get rid of their golliwog mascot for a similar reason, and there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth, but in the end it's a minor inconvenience.

Isn't the real issue with the name "Jewcookie" the terrible temptation to make horrible jokes about ovens?



...*cough*

Delcat wrote:

Isn't the real issue with the name "Jewcookie" the terrible temptation to make horrible jokes about ovens?



...*cough*

Go check out the only entry for "jewcookie" on Urban Dictionary.

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

V3N0M wrote:

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

The Bradley Amendment? You mean the one proposed by a guy?

Come here, little lolcow... (brands)

Cyberwulf wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

The Bradley Amendment? You mean the one proposed by a guy?

Are you implying that indulging in feminism, radical or not, requires a vagina?

Jay/Cris wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

The Bradley Amendment? You mean the one proposed by a guy?

Are you implying that indulging in feminism, radical or not, requires a vagina?

Well, she was specifically talking about radical feminism, which...yeah. I don't know too many male radical feminists.

Bamshalam wrote:

Jay/Cris wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

The Bradley Amendment? You mean the one proposed by a guy?

Are you implying that indulging in feminism, radical or not, requires a vagina?

Well, she was specifically talking about radical feminism, which...yeah. I don't know too many male radical feminists.

Hm. To be fair, I can only come up with William Moulton Marston and Kurt Cobain. Moulton Marston analysed Wonder Woman and while some of his observations are pretty apt, the conclusion that all male readers want to tie up/dominate all women they perceive as weaker and want to be tied up/dominated by all women they perceive as stronger isn't entirely feasible. (At least, I hope it isn't.) He suggested the latter was the ideal case, since that would lead to a harmonious matriarchy.
As for Kurt Cobain - well, he was self-proclaimed feminist, and he was pretty rad.

You're continually missing the word 'radical' here. Men can definitely be feminists, but, again, I haven't really heard of many male radical feminists. William Moulton Marston is the closest I've heard of, and even then he just seems like he's more inverse Freud than anything else.

Considering that feminism is all about equality for the sexes, I think the idea that the patriarchy should be replaced with a matriarchy to solve all problems of humanity to be a pretty radical interpretation of feminism, yeah.
What would you consider to go beyond ´regular´ feminism and cross over into radical, then? I mean, I'm not that well-versed in feminism - being only familiar with some feminists in literary theory, where things can get pretty out-there* - so I wonder where the line can be drawn there. (I mean, radical isn't quite the same as crazy, right?)

***

*Just look at Judith Butler, who, while commenting on a fictional documentary on drag queens, concludes that movie-making can't ever be a truly feminist medium anyway, since using the camera essentially means wielding a phallic symbol.

Jay/Cris wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

The Bradley Amendment? You mean the one proposed by a guy?

Are you implying that indulging in feminism, radical or not, requires a vagina?

I should clarify - I looked up the Bradley Amendment and found out it relates to payment of child support. In my experience, people who whinge about child support and blame feminists for it tend to conflate feminists with women in general, and also tend to have problems with women. Hence taunting VENOM by remarking that it was proposed by a male politician.

Jay you're wrong because you have a penis. Being gay only gets you so much street cred.

cocks

Jay/Cris wrote:

Anyway. Fine. You've inspired me to change my wicked ways: from now on, I will not be guided by gender when I'm calling someone names. Instead, I will use gender-neutral terms like fuckwit and imbecile. Oh, better yet: how about I call everyone a bitch, never mind their actual sex? That oughta improve my general political correctness, don'tcha think?

++ -
Fucking fail.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Jay/Cris wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

Google "Bradley Ammendment" and then try to tell me radical feminism is just a fringe thing.

The Bradley Amendment? You mean the one proposed by a guy?

Are you implying that indulging in feminism, radical or not, requires a vagina?

I should clarify - I looked up the Bradley Amendment and found out it relates to payment of child support. In my experience, people who whinge about child support and blame feminists for it tend to conflate feminists with women in general, and also tend to have problems with women. Hence taunting VENOM by remarking that it was proposed by a male politician.

True, but there are relatively few non custodial mothers and the comparisons to debtor's prison are very accurate. The main reason it is in place is because the govenrnment gets a cut of the money. The ammendment states that the requirement to pay child support cannot be revoked for any reason, even if you are able to prove that you are not the father. The CSA demands unneccessarily large amounts of money from non-custodial parents and if you don't (or can't) pay, they will literally make it harder for you to escape the debt.

V3N0M wrote:

The CSA demands unneccessarily large amounts of money from non-custodial parents and if you don't (or can't) pay, they will literally make it harder for you to escape the debt.

I'll bite. Sure, it's with a personal anecdote, but this is a situation that you probably didn't consider. My parents divorced when I was very young, and my mother got custody of me. Sure, okay. Then, my father was required to pay child support- but he never did. Do you know how many parents don't pay child support? The laws are easy to get around- make money under the table and it won't be garnished from your paycheck. It happens more often than you think. So just because something is a written law doesn't mean it's the same across the board and the status quo. And if I recall correctly, he even managed to go to court to eliminate the thousands he never paid, and won.

There went $20k that could have been used to... I don't know, give me a better start in life? Isn't that what parents are for? Fuck, he got married. That's a motherfucking commitment and getting out of paying child support only hurts the child- not only making life hard, but giving the kid a damn good reason to resent their father. Dad paid to have his stepdaughter sent to an Ivy League school- but never paid a cent for me, dude. Never even wanted to see me, and long since pretended that I didn't exist. Ever been beaten by your dad? Ever fought back? Paying child support would have been the LEAST he could have done. Child support evasion is all too common- even if he didn't make enough to make the court-mandated payment, he could have at least sent something my way every now and then to show he cared about me, even if he continued to do nothing else. I mean hell, I could have actually eaten lunch or something.

So why should the parents that don't skip out on child support get treated so horribly?

Oh, and I fought back against my mother. Does that count for anything?

V3N0M wrote:

So why should the parents that don't skip out on child support get treated so horribly?

My cousin pays child support and sees his daughter regularly. He pays because he loves his kid, and isn't treated horribly at all. Not only does he pay child support, he... is being a supportive dad. Sees her more than once a week, is always there for her, and is just overall an awesome dude.

V3N0M wrote:

Oh, and I fought back against my mother. Does that count for anything?

That statement is irrelevant. You have yet to explain yourself anyway.

Nihilist wrote:

V3N0M wrote:

So why should the parents that don't skip out on child support get treated so horribly?

My cousin pays child support and sees his daughter regularly. He pays because he loves his kid, and isn't treated horribly at all.

Most "deadbeat dads" genuinely want to see their kids but lost a custody battle against an ex who demanded sole custody. Your cousin's ex probably isn't like that.