RE: Feminism (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Ask a Mistress



Message

ElWray -> RE: Feminism (10/22/2009 8:17:02 PM)

quote:

Original: Shaktisama
But young girls pouring their energy in high school into a pursuit that will never produce a viable income and cannot be anything more than a "hobby" for them as adults, while boys can parlay their athletic pursuits into a  full ride college scholarship and possible a minimum of 640K a year as professional athletes--that isn't at all sexist or offensive to you, right?

 
Interesting, so you ignore my post pointing to the repeated correction of your take on cheerleaders and continue on your tirade against them. Very interesting indeed.
 
Well, since you appear to be abandoning your "panties" comment that's already been disproven (while not admitting you're abandoning it of course) I suppose I'll shoot holes in your new 'argument.'
 
Firstly, it's a very small percentage of boys who can make a professional career out of any sport. Every major league has rules limiting the number of players a team can have. Considering how many colleges there are and how many high school teams, it's a small percentage indeed that can actually make pro-sports.
 
Once one is lucky enough to make pro sports, their career is not long lived, certainly not when compared to a job that doesn't involve sports. Most players are considered 'past their prime' even before age 40. Terrell Owens has already got rumors of his career being over and he just turned 36.
 
However, cheerleaders (who also get scholarships), turn their scholarships into actual careers that don't involve risking their bodies on a daily basis. You see a football player's career can be over after a single pro game -- which has indeed happened. When it does happen, if the player hasn't finished college (many don't before going pro) then their options are severely limited.
 
A pro-cheerleader (as we've already said) is doing cheerleading strictly as an extra-curricular activity, and certainly nowhere near on-par with what college or high school cheerleading is. Ergo, they have a much longer and lucrative career ahead of them as long as their degree isn't in something lame like basket weaving.
 
So, it appears to me, that despite your rabid hatred of cheerleaders (where you kicked of a squad or something?) cheerleaders can and do have it much better than the small percent of men who are lucky enough to become a pro athlete.
 
quote:

Original: Shaktisama
What's more, it's ugly, twisted, dangerous bullshit, which allows people to make excuses for pushing younger and younger and younger children into a sexually exploitive costumes and sexually provocative role.


Ahhh. Here we come back to your issue with their 'costumes.' Please oh please re-read my previous post on the matter (it's two pages back if you need help finding it). If you think 'dance' has costumes that are so much better, you're sadly mistaken. I've provided numerous examples as to why, though I don't expect you to admit your position is compromised. I just know that it is. And that amuses me.



Elisabella -> RE: Feminism (10/22/2009 11:34:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LaTigresse

And I have to chime my unwanted two cents in here.

The thing that grated on me about

"Like I said above, I have no problem with people being feminists in their own homes and private lives. It's when they want to change society to fit in with their desires that I get annoyed"

is that the basic concepts of feminism SHOULD be an integral part of society. Equal for all. It is when it gets specific, in a consenting relationship etc. etc. that it can be on a take it or leave it.


See, that's not the world I want to live in. If a national draft is reinstated, I don't want to be drafted. If I get pregnant, I don't want to lose my maternity leave. I like the fact that my guy friends will change a tire or assemble a bookcase for me rather than telling me "don't be a pussy do it yourself" like they would with another guy.

I don't want to live in a world that thinks men and women are identical. This thread hasn't been about legalities like being able to vote or enlisting in the military - it's been about the social expectations that are given to each gender. A girl who chugs beer and belches while watching football is a tomboy, a guy who gets his brows waxed and has manicures is effeminate. I like that world.

Social expectations don't completely disappear, they just change and evolve. You can't just say you want to have a world where a woman isn't expected to do certain things, without replacing it with new expectations. A woman isn't expected to stay home and have babies...but now she is expected to have a good career. You can say "well women can choose to stay home and have babies" but the fact is society would look at her differently. Just like 50 years ago a woman could choose to eschew marriage and have a career...and she'd also have social repercussions.

You say people can choose to act feminine, I say people can choose to act gender-neutral. But this thread isn't about personal choices in one's own relationship, it's about society. If society has gender roles, those who act gender neutral will be seen as different; if society is gender neutral those who are traditionally feminine or masculine will be seen as different. I really don't think there can be a happy medium where both gender roles and gender neutrality are fully integrated into society.

quote:

I will not allow a woman that wants to be treated as less than equal, to be an influence on MY life. I don't believe she has the right to allow her personal lifestyle choice to be an influence on ANY other woman's choice.


Who said anything about equality? Why do you assume gender roles must equal "men superior, women inferior?"

quote:

If a woman wishes to submit to [...] believe that her man is superiour to her in some way........that is HER right.


Honey, it's not a right, it's a fact. Men are superior to women in many ways when you look at the averages - speed and strength are the first that come to mind. Like I said earlier women are also superior to men in many ways, we have better balance due to our lower centre of gravity, we have better verbal skills (men have better spatial skills) and we can withstand severe temperature better.

It's not a D/s or 1950's household thing - men aren't better football players because of sexism. They're better football players because they are taller and stronger and faster than women.

Don't believe me?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_athletics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_world_records_in_swimming

quote:


But I will not allow her to use her choices to define me in my life. She can yap about nature and her one true way until her face turns blue. I will support her right to live it but I will tell her to shut the fuck up when she insists on telling me that living my life my way needs to be kept hidden and out of her sight.


Check back at the bit you quoted - look what it was in reply to. It was a facetious reply to ShaktiSama saying she has no problem with traditional relationships in people's private lives, only that she has a problem with that type of interaction being a part of society.

I have a problem with the aims of modern day feminists being a part of society. Women can have their househusbands and their nannies and their 80 hour a week career and their Carrie Bradshaw one night stands all they want...I just really don't want that to be the standard role that women are expected to fit into.



Venatrix -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 3:53:05 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Elisabella

See, that's not the world I want to live in. If a national draft is reinstated, I don't want to be drafted. If I get pregnant, I don't want to lose my maternity leave. I like the fact that my guy friends will change a tire or assemble a bookcase for me rather than telling me "don't be a pussy do it yourself" like they would with another guy.

I don't want to live in a world that thinks men and women are identical. This thread hasn't been about legalities like being able to vote or enlisting in the military - it's been about the social expectations that are given to each gender. A girl who chugs beer and belches while watching football is a tomboy, a guy who gets his brows waxed and has manicures is effeminate. I like that world.



Well, guess what?  We don't always get the world we want.  People work towards making the world the world they want, and equal opportunity is what people in the West have been working towards these past few decades.  It's completely ignorant to think that you can have equal opportunity in the workplace, yet not have it spill over into private life. 

So, privately, you are welcome to choose whatever kind of life works for you, but I don't want to go back to the days when a man had the right to beat his wife, as long he he used a rod no thicker than his thumb.  Why don't you go do some historical research about what life was really like for women in an unempancipated society (and still is, in many countries across the globe) and leave your silly, airy-fairy fantasies about knights in shining armour coming to your rescue for the privacy of your own home?



LaTigresse -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 4:35:11 AM)

Elisabella, first of all, you can keep your degrading "honey" snipes to yourself. I've not stooped to childish name calling like others I am simply making a point that you do not agree with.

Secondly, I read your reply to me as somewhat of a "I want to take what I like about feminism and use it, but the part that makes it harder for me personally, I want to disregard."

Well too bad. You cannot have the right to things like maternity leave and give the father the same rights. Fair is fair. And descrimination is descrimination. Whether you like it or not.

Yes, social expectations are evolving but neither you nor I can determine exactly how. It is unfortunate I know, I would like to be the QueenBitchoftheUniverse but I am quite aware that it's not likely to happen.

Just because a man is physcially larger in size does NOT make him a superiour human. In fact, within the laws of our society, the very biological facts that make them bigger and stronger, may indeed at times make them inferiour human beings. The prisons are full of men that were overly endowed with testosterone.

Forgive me if I cry foul on your expectation of women and babies. I am not sure what society you live in and what the expectations there are, but the society I live in find it completely acceptable for a woman to stay home and raise her children. It is very possible for her to return to work in whatever capacity she chooses, at any point. Of course there are financial sacrifices, so far no one is paying people to stay home and parent......unless you count the government welfare system.

I personally do not see a "standard" especially the standard you seem so violently against. Perhaps where you live there are huge differences in the way women must fit into tidy little boxes.

The day changing a tire or assembling a bookcase is so difficult I need a person of another gender to do it........I will be too old and decrepit to wipe my own ass. Either gender will be able to do it for me and I probably shouldn't be driving anyway.

However, where I live, being a woman means having choices. In fact, I see women as having more choices than men.

So yes Elisabella, you really can dramatize the downfall of family and society as we know it and blame feminism but, based upon the examples I see DAILY, I will say bullshit.

And I will not sink to childish name calling and sniping to do so. THAT would make me look like an inferiour human being and I strive for otherwise.



ElWray -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:00:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
So, privately, you are welcome to choose whatever kind of life works for you, but I don't want to go back to the days when a man had the right to beat his wife, as long he he used a rod no thicker than his thumb. 


Firstly, it's amusing to me to see a comment like this on a BDSM message board. But I'll leave that one alone for a moment.

On another note related to the same comment, why does what Elisabella said have be taken to such extremes? Why does her view automatically take your mind back to the days when "men could beat their wives as long as they used a rod no bigger than their thumb?"

That's a bit of a far pendulum swing the other way, don't you think? A bit....I don't know...reactionary?

Here's something interesting, considering the current thread topic. Our local news is running stories of interest to women (no doubt due to breast cancer awareness month or whatever). Anyway, a survey was recently conducted by Time Magazine and the Rockerfeller Foundation.

The question asked was what women want for their daughters' futures.
56% said Marriage and children
23% said an interesting career and,
20% said Financial success.

The survey was duplicated locally by the local news station, the results said:
49% said Marriage and children
37% said Financial success
14% said an interesting career.

So. I guess for lack of anything better to add, I'll simply say "Put that in your feminist pipe and smoke it."
[:D]



Venatrix -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:23:15 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElWray

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
So, privately, you are welcome to choose whatever kind of life works for you, but I don't want to go back to the days when a man had the right to beat his wife, as long he he used a rod no thicker than his thumb. 


Firstly, it's amusing to me to see a comment like this on a BDSM message board. But I'll leave that one alone for a moment.



Yep, having no choice about whether you are beaten is hilarious.  It's a fucking riot, in fact.  I'm glad you find it so funny.  I'm sure millions of women around the world who are non-consensually beaten find the joke just as amusing as you do.  My mother was beaten so badly by a boyfriend that she went to the hospital with a broken nose and dislocated cornea.  I've been splitting my sides over that one ever since.

quote:



On another note related to the same comment, why does what Elisabella said have be taken to such extremes? Why does her view automatically take your mind back to the days when "men could beat their wives as long as they used a rod no bigger than their thumb?"



I was deliberately making an extreme connection, because it seems like a lot of people posting on these boards have forgotten just how bad things used to be for women, and still are in many places.  But kudos to you for being bright enough to pick up on it.

quote:



That's a bit of a far pendulum swing the other way, don't you think? A bit....I don't know...reactionary?



If you mean that my comments are a reaction to the silliness of some people on this thread, then absolutely.  As a woman, I have no choice but to react when people promote the elimination of my rights as a human being.

quote:


Here's something interesting, considering the current thread topic. Our local news is running stories of interest to women (no doubt due to breast cancer awareness month or whatever). Anyway, a survey was recently conducted by Time Magazine and the Rockerfeller Foundation.

The question asked was what women want for their daughters' futures.
56% said Marriage and children
23% said an interesting career and,
20% said Financial success.


Yeah, so?  That only indicates that half or almost half want something else for their daughters, which is pretty good.  And in any case, these things aren't mutually exclusive.  The statistics most likely represent women who have only had a marriage and children in their lives, and don't know anything different.  As Will Rogers said, there are lies, damned lies and statistics.  By the way, I particularly like your dismissive line about stories of women's interest being published only because of breast-cancer awareness month, as if they were of no consequence otherwise, and as if breast-cancer awareness were a minor concern.  You're a real charmer, aren't you?

quote:


So. I guess for lack of anything better to add, I'll simply say "Put that in your feminist pipe and smoke it."
[:D]



I could tell you where to put your comments, too, but that would mean I'd be sinking to your level.  I try to set my sights a bit higher than that.



KYsissy -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:28:05 AM)

quote:

It's the same with the race car girls parading beside the sleek mechanical chariots before the race. And this is taking place all around the world when it comes to flatter the males' ego to make them pay for something.

I am not so sure it always corresponds to the general taste of the public. What I noticed in this kind of popular culture, is that the marketing is very outdated, it's slow to notice the changes in society.


It is definitely changing. The "race car girls" are now parading next to the cars in Nomex suits carrying their helmets.
Now THAT is sexy.  My current favorite is Milka Duno. A Naval engineer with four masters degrees who turned race car driver.  Yes she is beautiful, but it is her accomplishments and drive that make her very sexy to me.

I know, I know we were discussing feminism.  But feminists can still be sexy.



Venatrix -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:32:36 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KYsissy

I know, I know we were discussing feminism.  But feminists can still be sexy.



I've always maintained that feminism *is* sexy!



ElWray -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:37:23 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
Yep, having no choice about whether you are beaten is hilarious.  It's a fucking riot, in fact.  I'm glad you find it so funny.  I'm sure millions of women around the world who are non-consensually beaten find the joke just as amusing as you do.  My mother was beaten so badly by a boyfriend that she went to the hospital with a broken nose and dislocated cornea.  I've been splitting my sides over that one ever since.


Again with the reactionary. Firstly, you made no distinction between consentual and non-consentual, so neither did I. Tone down your irrational, emotional reaction for a half-second. I realize what happened to your mom may have caused your desire to hurt men, but I didn't hurt her, so dial it back a bit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
I was deliberately making an extreme connection, because it seems like a lot of people posting on these boards have forgotten just how bad things used to be for women, and still are in many places.  But kudos to you for being bright enough to pick up on it.


Just because it "used to be that way' or 'still is in many places' doesn't mean that an anti-feminist stance will cause us to rapidly degrade as a nation. Again, that's just being extreme for the sake of being extreme and does nothing to help your cause.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
If you mean that my comments are a reaction to the silliness of some people on this thread, then absolutely.  As a woman, I have no choice but to react when people promote the elimination of my rights as a human being.


Actually, I think you know exactly what I meant. I meant reactionary in the sense that you feel any form of a woman wanting to stay in the home suddenly throws all women back to the days of routine beatings. It doesn't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
Yeah, so?  That only indicates that half or almost half want something else for their daughters, which is pretty good.  And in any case, these things aren't mutually exclusive. 


Actually, it indicates that the majority want their daughters to marry and have children and don't care about their careers. Sounds like a nice pendulum swing in the opposite direction of the feminist agenda to me.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Venatrix
I could tell you where to put your comments, too, but that would mean I'd be sinking to your level.  I try to set my sights a bit higher than that.


The anti-sinking is still sinking. I think you know that. It's no different that if you were to say "I'd tell you to go to go fuck yourself, but I won't cuss." You're still saying it by not saying it. Don't delude yourself into thinking you're taking the high road. The true high road would have been to ignore it completely. Thanks for sinking. :)



Venatrix -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:00:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElWray

Again with the reactionary. Firstly, you made no distinction between consentual and non-consentual, so neither did I. Tone down your irrational, emotional reaction for a half-second. I realize what happened to your mom may have caused your desire to hurt men, but I didn't hurt her, so dial it back a bit.


Ordering complete strangers to "tone down" their discourse and "dial it back a bit" makes you look like a rude arsehole.  I'm not, nor is any woman, under any obligation to satisfy your wishes, comprenez?

Anyone with half a brain in his head would have understood that I was talking about non-consensual beatings.  You're just trying to get out of looking like a complete git by blaming your response on a lack of clarity on my part.  Nice try, but it won't work.

quote:



Actually, I think you know exactly what I meant. I meant reactionary in the sense that you feel any form of a woman wanting to stay in the home suddenly throws all women back to the days of routine beatings. It doesn't.



Where did I say that?  Again, as with other posters, you are twisting our words to suit your own agenda.  I've said all along that I don't have a problem with what people do in their private lives.


quote:



Actually, it indicates that the majority want their daughters to marry and have children and don't care about their careers. Sounds like a nice pendulum swing in the opposite direction of the feminist agenda to me.


Perhaps you are unaware of how surveys work, but it indicates only that the group of people asked felt that way.  It says nothing about people outside of that survey.  If your position is so weak, then by all means, rely on a small sample of women's opinions to support it. 


quote:


The anti-sinking is still sinking. I think you know that. It's no different that if you were to say "I'd tell you to go to go fuck yourself, but I won't cuss." You're still saying it by not saying it. Don't delude yourself into thinking you're taking the high road. The true high road would have been to ignore it completely. Thanks for sinking. :)


I was merely interested in emphasising your rudeness, and it seems I've done a good job of that.  But thanks for helping me along.  Now, I have things to do, and they don't include continuing to debate with the obstinately obtuse.



Lucienne -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:59:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ElWray
Actually, it indicates that the majority want their daughters to marry and have children and don't care about their careers. Sounds like a nice pendulum swing in the opposite direction of the feminist agenda to me.



Breaking news: Moms want grand kids!

Generally speaking, I think it's important to look at the questions asked, the sample size, and how the poll was conducted when analyzing a poll. We don't have any of that information here. Your reading of the poll results is still kind of funny. Feminism isn't anti-relationship and anti-reproduction. As far as the pendulum swing, I'd be surprised if you could find poll numbers with a smaller percentage of woman stating they would want their daughters to be married and have kids. Having only a bare majority say "yes" is kind of a shockingly low number. Think about it. What mom doesn't want grand kids? Do you really think the number would be significantly smaller if you asked women what they wanted for their sons? I just don't think the poll says what you think it says.

And I state that after having put them in my feminist pipe and smoked them. They were a bit clovey for my tastes.



pyroaquatic -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 4:12:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite

quote:

ORIGINAL: pyroaquatic
The Cheerleader was not enslaved into the position of being a cheerleader. It was her choice, which is a whole lot better than what it was years ago. It is up to her to spread her legs or not.


Sure, cheerleaders literally spread their legs (ie. doing splits), but I disagree that that means they are sluts who take on the whole football team or have sex in the back of the bus. I know several former cheerleaders who aren't like that at all, and didn't date any of the jocks. These attitudes seem *really* sexist and offensive to me!


CHOICE!!! THEY HAVE A CHOICE!!! I also disagree with you.

Hello Venatrix how was your holiday?



zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:26:40 PM)

~FR~

I grew up in the 60s-70s. People would ask me what I wanted to be when I grew up and I would tell them I wanted to take care of the home....children optional. Immediately the women would look horrified and remind me that I could be anything I wanted....and I would repeat that I wanted to take care of the home. What followed was a long lecture about how now women had choices, they could be doctors, lawyer, heads of corporations, scientists etc. Great but I wanted to take care of the home dammit. It's not like I had been brainwashed, I grew up in a neighborhood populated by boys, I knew damn well I could do those things, my parents raised me to believe that I could do anything I set my mind to...but I wasn't interested. So I got this confusing mixed message that women could be anything....but my choice wasn't good enough, I had to want more than that.

How is it that we are free  to make the choices we want as long as they are choices radical feminists say we should want? To my mind that is still oppressing women, it's just the women doing it (ironic huh?) instead of men.



youngsubgeoff -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 5:58:30 PM)

Ive actually been screwed out of a scholarship because I had the wrong set of genitals between my legs. A local group had a scholarship for single parents, or so it said. Long story short, this meth adict mom of 6 (close your fucking legs, you cant even support yourself!), with a FELONY record, got the scholarship. What the hell is a college degree going to do for her? Nobody worth working for hires felons for anything but manual labor, if at all.

I hate affirmative action. If your less qualified, why the FUCK should you get a job over me just because of your race or gender, neither of wich someone can control? And why the hell should I be punished for it?



Venatrix -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:02:55 PM)

Hello, my dear.  Thank you for asking about my holiday.  It was just fabulous - I felt like I'd never left London, and I haven't been back in years.  I met two very charming men from CM (they know about each other, so I'm not giving away any secrets), and thoroughly enjoyed myself.  Ah, it's good to be queen . . .

I hope all has been well with you, and that you've behaved yourself in my absence.

End of hijack.  Sorry about that, everyone.



zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:04:05 PM)

Yes that's right they did it just to punish YOU [8|]



Venatrix -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:08:19 PM)

Geoff, maybe it's got nothing to do with gender.  Maybe it's because you're perenially angry, or you can't spell, or you were on drugs at the time and those sponsoring the scholarship thought a reformed felon was a better bet than a non-reformed drug addict.  The decision could have been based on any number of things besides the fact that you aren't a female.  Blaming your failure on "the system" is taking the easy way out. 



youngsubgeoff -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:21:27 PM)

actually, at that point I was clean, had a full time job, and to this day all that is on my record is a couple speeding tickets. Im betting that the only difference is because Im a man.



zephyroftheNorth -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 6:25:25 PM)

But you are just speculating....you do not know and will never know if that was the reason they chose her over you.



ShaktiSama -> RE: Feminism (10/23/2009 7:09:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andalusite
ShaktiSama, I already agreed that I think that cheerleaders' uniforms should be changed, especially for the younger girls. Probably there are *some* cheerleaders who are also sluts, but *assuming* that all of them are is sexist, misogynistic, and downright wrong/mistaken.


*shrug*  Your interpretation of my words and the intention behind them is dubious in the extreme, but....sure.  Whatever.  Please feel free to ignore the substance of whatever I say, and pick a few words out of context so that you can get offended and argue issues that are irrelevant.

I never said all cheerleaders had to be sluts--but SINCE you mention it:  it certainly helps, doesn't it?  Because that is what they are supposed to be, socially speaking, and it is the meaning of the iconography of the football field.  Cheerleaders are a very special and sacralized kind of symbolic slut, the sort of slut that rewards valor and victory.  Thematically and iconographically, they are no different from the barmaids of Valhalla, or the houris of an Islamic paradise.   

And from my point of view, in all seriousness?  Getting access to male genitalia is the ONLY material benefit that I see associated with cheerleading as a pursuit.  In terms of any and EVERY other practical objective that might be achieved, it is a complete and utter waste of any human being's time.

quote:

 *Most* children who are athletes don't become professionals, whether male or female.


I agree.  None of my stepbrothers became professional athletes, for example.  What they DID do was use their athletic abilities to get free access to higher education which otherwise would have cost them thousands of dollars that the family could NEVER have fronted the bill for.  The oldest brother became a professional vet after playing football in college--and he started his professional life free of debt, which is an enormous advantage in life.

In short?  Women and girls get SCREWED in this equation, at every level.  Not sure what part of this you are incapable of understanding, and why you insist on derailing the point with this crap about "how I knew this cheerleader once who never had sex with no one, nosirree", but honestly, I don't care.  I've lost interest in debating whether or not I am "offensively sexist" for stating irrefutable social and economic facts in blunt terms.

I'm sorry that reality is ugly and sexist.  But it is what it is, until we change it.  And denial doesn't help.

quote:

 Just because I started out as a Domme and am now a slave doesn't mean that any other Domme will do so as well. MaamJay and lovingpet are both also switches who are currently in M/s relationships with a man as well - do you feel they don't have any right to post here either?


I have no power to prevent you or anyone else from posting here.  I am capable, however, of assessing whether you and I have any basis for real communication, and of deciding whether responding to your posts is a useful investment of my time.

I am also able to see the writing on the wall, when it comes to assessing your position on various issues.  Really, all I have to do is look at who is reading and applauding your posts, and agreeing with what you seem to think is the "proper" definition of sexism, and at whom the charges of "sexist" and "misogynist" should be leveled.

All your fans on this thread are either

1) men who are arguing in favor of a sexist system which benefits their gender and who don't see the problem with a system that economically and socially marginalizes women

2) blatant misogynist provocateurs who try to undermine any discussion of double standards on these forums, usually by leaping in to throw the words "sexism" and "oppression" at feminists, and putting forth arguments that feminists try to deprive women of choice because the majority of women "choose" to be inferior to men because they love it so,

or

3) repulsive "Uncle Tom" anti-feminists who argue that double standards and male dominant injustice are the basis of some kind of bizarro Gorean utopia.

So....yeah.  Can't imagine why I would think that your worldview and mine might be fundamentally incompatible.  Whether or not you've ever spanked anyone's ass or whether you have the "right" to post is not the issue.  I don't come to these forums to argue with femme subs about a woman's proper place in the world.



Page: <<   < prev  10 11 [12] 13 14   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875