Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custody bill


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custody bill Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/9/2016 3:55:28 PM   
Kaliko


Posts: 3381
Joined: 9/25/2010
Status: offline
FR

So, back on the topic of the original post...

NOW is a feminist organization, yes?

This is from the Florida NOW Facebook page, their most recent post:

quote:

ALIMONY BILL
The Governor now has SB668 on his desk. He has 15 days to sign, veto, or let it become law without his signature.
Please call and/or email the Governor ASAP.
This is it! Speak up! Stop this horrible bill from becoming law. The courts should decide child support and alimony terms, not a 1 size fits all law.


This Facebook post is incredibly misleading. The bill is clearly not a one size fits all law. It allows for oodles of provisions to be made based on certain circumstances, including, for example: the length of time the child has lived in a stable school and community environment, length of time to travel to and from school, the mental and physical health of the parents, and the ability to provide a consistent routine for the child.

If NOW is indeed a feminist organization, how is it that they are opposing a bill that begins with equality and then allows considerations based on the actual circumstances? What's to oppose, there?

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/9/2016 4:05:44 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

Your inculcation in - and regurgitation of - feminist dogma does not make you an expert. It makes you a fool.


Well, whatever: I *am* an expert on this subject, Awareness. I've marked more than five thousand essays on the subject in the last ten years - those of high schoolers, those of undergrads, and those of postgrads. Sorry, but what else can I say? I know that I know what I'm talking about. I also know that you don't - god knows, I've failed too many essays of people who have presented arguments like yours.

Listen, old son - is it screwing you up in some way that I'm a malesub? Does it fracture your worldview in some way? If so, you should try to get past that. You'll keep getting roasted by blokes like me otherwise.


_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/9/2016 6:32:00 PM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
Feminists believe in equality of the sexes, Awareness, and if somebody announces that s/he believes in something that isn't about equality of the sexes, then s/he isn't supporting a feminist viewpoint.


Just out of idle curiosity, how would this differ from a humanist point of view which believes that all humans should be equal? If one embraces the view that all humans are equal, then that would cover everything.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/9/2016 9:48:44 PM   
respectmen


Posts: 2042
Joined: 8/28/2015
Status: offline
quote:

Feminists believe in equality of the sexes, Awareness, and if somebody announces that s/he believes in something that isn't about equality of the sexes, then s/he isn't supporting a feminist viewpoint.


As I keep having to explain to feminists, feminism doesn't own the concept of "equality" as the concept of equality has been around a long time before the concept of feminism was created.

So to think that if a person believes in gender equality, that means they are a feminist, no ifs or buts, you are pretty much taking on a totalitarian stance. Anyone can believe in gender equality regardless if they believe in some messed up ideology or not.

Anyway, peon, it would be interesting for you to explain why feminists are fighting against equal custody, while on the other hand, are supposed to be about "equality".

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/9/2016 10:16:17 PM   
marygift121


Posts: 1
Joined: 4/9/2016
Status: offline
Hello, I am gift
How are you? hope you are fine and in perfect condition of health. Please I went through your profile and i read it and took interest in it, please if you don't mind i will like you to write me on this ID ([email protected]) hope to hear from you soon, and I will be waiting for your mail because i have something VERY important to tell you.
Lots of love
gift.



(in reply to respectmen)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/13/2016 4:56:31 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

Your inculcation in - and regurgitation of - feminist dogma does not make you an expert. It makes you a fool.


Well, whatever: I *am* an expert on this subject, Awareness. I've marked more than five thousand essays on the subject in the last ten years - those of high schoolers, those of undergrads, and those of postgrads. Sorry, but what else can I say? I know that I know what I'm talking about. I also know that you don't - god knows, I've failed too many essays of people who have presented arguments like yours.
Peon, unfortunately, you represent the utter failure of the British academic system to teach - and it's a failure, I might add, that is only present in Arts and Humanities degrees. Thank God, the STEM subjects are simply not amenable to dogma - gravity does not vary based upon how you feel about it.

The problem here is that you've revealed a mind that is unsuitable to teaching students to think, question or reason. There is no logic behind any of your statements and indeed, your constant avoidance of recognising any feminist or group as being responsible for feminist dogma is a telling sign. By constantly reverting to a dictionary definition - as indeed you were taught to do - you encapsulate the deceptive shifty practice of feminism in action. Engaging in constant social and legislative attack upon men, then denying those very attacks by claiming feminism is a dictionary definition.

What you're failing students for lad, is failing to regurgitate your dogma. Make no mistake, you're not actually teaching anything. You're attempting to indoctrinate utter minds with absolute codswallop while simultaneously trying to anesthetise them so they don't actually question the ludicrous nonsense you're teaching which quite easily collapses on its own internal logic when examined by a competent, inquiring mind.

You're an indoctrination machine, lad, nothing more. And this is basically the problem with the Left's vice-like grip on British academia and its ongoing war on academic freedom.

The mistake you made is to cling to your definition, asserting black is white despite all the evidence to the contrary. You lack the intellectual chops to engage in a rigorous debate about feminism on its own merits which is why you constantly avoid it by clinging to a definition and consistently engaging in the One True Scotsman fallacy.

Essentially, this represents your own indoctrination by similar regurgitation machines and your inability to actually think about your own brainwashing. You're no expert, lad - you're a mindless tool, nothing more.

quote:


Listen, old son - is it screwing you up in some way that I'm a malesub? Does it fracture your worldview in some way? If so, you should try to get past that. You'll keep getting roasted by blokes like me otherwise.
I think your predilections inform your worldview and reinforce the brainwashing that keeps you in bondage and prevents you from thinking. You want to believe these things, because to do otherwise would undermine your own feelings about your desires for female supremacy.

I mean, look how ludicrous you've become - you're claiming victory despite being soundly defeated. You've been unable to justify your position at all and your own claims are specious, verging on laughable.

Basically Peon, you're just not very good at this. Which seems quaintly appropriate given your claim to be part of British academia. In short, I am not surprised - except by your ludicrous claims of competence.


< Message edited by Awareness -- 4/13/2016 5:00:01 AM >


_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/13/2016 7:13:49 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
What a pompous lot of nonsense. It's one thing to be condescending from a position of knowledge and authority on a topic. It's quite another thing to attempt to hide one's ignorance of the topic by trying to be condescending and superior.

For all the pretension and bluster, you seem unable to specify any point on which Peon's position is false, even though his understanding of feminism appears to be vastly superior to yours. It appears that your idea of feminism is that it's "engaging in constant social and legislative attack upon men" (post #26) because "feminists y'see don't like men that much" (post#5). It's a measure of your arrogance that you attempt to make the women's movement all about men like you. It's not.

Feminism covers a broad range of allied philosophies/ideologies that advocate for equality of the sexes. It's not about you, not about men in general no matter how much you would like it to be. You simply aren't that important in the great scheme of things. It's about women improving their lot in life. And given your implacable opposition to feminism, I have to wonder why it is that you find women improving their lot in life so objectionable. I also have to wonder why you insist that you know better when people point out the correct meaning of the term 'feminism' when it's abundantly clear that you don't know better. I am yet to see any evidence that you know anything at all about feminism.

If you plan on continuing to post on this topic, do yourself a favour and take Peon's advice to learn a little bit about feminism. People are far more persuasive when they know what they are talking about. On this topic, it is patently clear to any one who does know a little about feminism that you don't know the first thing about it.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 4/13/2016 7:17:36 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/13/2016 7:33:36 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness
Peon keeps telling me that feminists do not do such things and are only interested in "blah, blah, blah... guacamola... equality of the sexes".


Feminists believe in equality of the sexes, Awareness, and if somebody announces that s/he believes in something that isn't about equality of the sexes, then s/he isn't supporting a feminist viewpoint.

quote:

This is about feminists vs men Lucy, not women. Feminists do not get to co-opt unwilling women and call them feminists simply because they possess a vagina.


Christ on a giraffe, do we have to do this over and over again?

Here is the standard definition of feminism. It is

"The belief that women are and should be treated as potential intellectual equals and social equals to men."

So, to sort out your comment to Lucy, you could have said, 'This is about women who believe that they are and should be treated as potential intellectual equals and social equals to men, vs men, Lucy, not *all* women'. And then you might want to go on to explain the nature of those women you are excluding from the definition of 'feminists' (and, if you feel like it, also explain why you like them so much. I for one would be fascinated in that.)


I would disagree Peon. In my experience, feminists have been solely seeking power for their groups. Not even power for women generally. For instance, when was the last time you saw a feminist fight for a woman to exercise pro-life, stay at home to raise kids, or do anything in an Islamic culture. They have issues. They want power for those issues. They have no concern for equatable freedom. I'll believe feminists want equality when they sue "For Women Only" health spas.

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/13/2016 7:35:30 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

What a pompous lot of nonsense. It's one thing to be condescending from a position of knowledge and authority on a topic. It's quite another thing to attempt to hide one's ignorance of the topic by trying to be condescending and superior.

For all the pretension and bluster, you seem unable to specify any point on which Peon's position is false, even though his understanding of feminism appears to be vastly superior to yours. It appears that your idea of feminism is that it's "engaging in constant social and legislative attack upon men" (post #26) because "feminists y'see don't like men that much" (post#5). It's a measure of your arrogance that you attempt to make the women's movement all about men like you. It's not.

Feminism covers a broad range of allied philosophies/ideologies that advocate for equality of the sexes. It's not about you, not about men in general no matter how much you would like it to be. You simply aren't that important in the great scheme of things. It's about women improving their lot in life. And given your implacable opposition to feminism, I have to wonder why it is that you find women improving their lot in life so objectionable. I also have to wonder why you insist that you know better when people point out the correct meaning of the term 'feminism' when it's abundantly clear that you don't know better. I am yet to see any evidence that you know anything at all about feminism.

If you plan on continuing to post on this topic, do yourself a favour and take Peon's advice to learn a little bit about feminism. People are far more persuasive when they know what they are talking about. On this topic, it is patently clear to any one who does know a little about feminism that you don't know the first thing about it.

So then your thesis is to be condescending from a position of knowledge, a position of authority, or both?

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/13/2016 11:07:33 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline
Case in point, power not equality.


http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/run-2016/articles/2016-04-12/in-new-york-clinton-exposing-sanders-by-going-small

On Tuesday, Clinton marked Equal Pay Day by participating in a roundtable in midtown Manhattan organized by Glassdoor, a California-based company that collects data on corporations and employee salaries.
The event stressed that women still only make 76 cents for every dollar paid to men, and that African-American and Hispanic females fare even worse, earning just 64 cents and 56 cents, respectively, for every dollar white men earn.

"The last time I checked, there's no discount for being a woman. Groceries don't cost us less, rent doesn't cost us less, so why should we be paid less?" Clinton said in her remarks.


http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/12/pay-gap-alert-clinton-foundation-male-execs-earn-38-more-than-women/

The foundation’s 2013 IRS form 990 reveals that nearly three times as many men as women occupy the executive suites at the Little Rock, Arkansas-based foundation.

On average, top male executives at the foundation earn $109,000 more than the top female executives with positions in the C-suite

(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 3:14:04 AM   
respectmen


Posts: 2042
Joined: 8/28/2015
Status: offline
tweakabelle


quote:

For all the pretension and bluster, you seem unable to specify any point on which Peon's position is false, even though his understanding of feminism appears to be vastly superior to yours


You and all the feminists in this thread seem unable to specify how the feminist position to the equal custody bill is justified. You like the feminists in this thread are being weasel cowards about it.

quote:

It appears that your idea of feminism is that it's "engaging in constant social and legislative attack upon men"


The feminist stance on the equal custody bill is a perfect example of this.

quote:

because "feminists y'see don't like men that much


The feminists who are rallying against this bill certainly don't like men.

quote:

It's a measure of your arrogance that you attempt to make the women's movement all about men like you. It's not.


He never indicated that it was all about men.

quote:

Feminism covers a broad range of allied philosophies/ideologies that advocate for equality of the sexes.


It certainly doesn't with the equal custody bill.

quote:

not about men in general no matter how much you would like it to be.


It is plenty of the time.

Manspreading, rape (teach men not to rape), domestic violence (teach men not to be violent), objectification, patriarchy theory, paygap, glass ceilings. The list goes on and on. These examples are all about criticism against men.

quote:

It's about women improving their lot in life


Regardless if it gives women a privilege over men such like their objection to the equal custody bill. Regardless if it makes men (fathers) suffer such like their objection to the equal custody bill.

What a bunch of self centered hypocrites.

quote:

I have to wonder why it is that you find women improving their lot in life so objectionable.


No one in this thread does. This is just a tired worn out tactic feminists and their supporters choose when a male just simply disagrees with feminist theories and opinions.

quote:

I also have to wonder why you insist that you know better when people point out the correct meaning of the term 'feminism' when it's abundantly clear that you don't know better. I am yet to see any evidence that you know anything at all about feminism.


That is very easy to answer. What feminists do is what feminism is. What the NOW do towards the equal custody bill is what feminism in the NOW is.

quote:

If you plan on continuing to post on this topic, do yourself a favour and take Peon's advice to learn a little bit about feminism.


Peon and your self obviously know less about feminism than Awareness. You and Peon keep claiming feminism is about equality when its obviously not as NOW are demanding inequality in child custody.

(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 5:53:33 AM   
Kaliko


Posts: 3381
Joined: 9/25/2010
Status: offline
FR

The April 12 Facebook post from the Fort Myers and Naples Chapter of the National Organization of Women pleads with its members to read this article Brian Burgess: Rick Scott should veto alimony bill because it's the right thing to do as a way of education as to why the bill is so awful. I can't even begin to go in to the misrepresentation and misstatements in the article, and I think the comments to the article do a fine job of pointing all of them out, so no need to regurgitate them here.

I thought this was interesting, though. Further down in that same Facebook post, we find:
quote:


"Opposition to the SB 668 is TRULY BIPARTISAN. Blue or Red – we all love children, moms and the sacrifices they make for their families. These moms and women do the real 'work that makes work possible.' "


So....we don't love dads?

The article that they refer to right after it, Julie Delegal: Rick Scott should veto alimony "reform" bill" states:

quote:

The bill robs judges of discretion in divorces by presuming in all cases that split custody arrangements are best for children, instead of evaluating custody based on the needs of individual kids.


Which is an outright lie.

Tweakabelle wonders "...why it is that you find women improving their lot in life so objectionable. I also have to wonder why you insist that you know better when people point out the correct meaning of the term 'feminism' when it's abundantly clear that you don't know better. I am yet to see any evidence that you know anything at all about feminism." I know that wasn't directed at me, but this, above, is why. The spitting of lies and spinning of the truth is what I know of feminism today. I actually do find the idea of women improving their lot in life objectionable. I support people improving their lot in life, ideally not at the expense of other people and certainly not with an army of lies cloaked in outrage.

(in reply to respectmen)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 6:23:36 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

What a pompous lot of nonsense. It's one thing to be condescending from a position of knowledge and authority on a topic. It's quite another thing to attempt to hide one's ignorance of the topic by trying to be condescending and superior.
Let me see if I can shine some light into your uneducated mind.

Political Science, m'dear - once you get past the surface patina of respectability - is about the use of tools and techniques for the acquisition of power. One of the earliest examples of the documentation of political science is Nicollo Machiavelli's "The Prince". A treatise on the acquisition and maintenance of power.

So, it's important to understand that political science operates in a meta context. Done properly it's about understanding the ways in which various movements, ideologies and individuals have acquired - and lost - power.

It is, intrinsically, amoral. True political science is about what works, not what is right. It's about what is expedient, not what is beneficial to the people.

Peon's presentation on feminism is not the viewpoint of a political scientist. Feminism is a political ideology constructed for the explicit purpose of further privileging already-privileged middle class white women. Any political scientist worth their salt would deconstruct the underpinnings of the movement, the presentation of a moral justification for feminism (thus making an attempt to win the moral war), the acquisition of power by feminists and how the use of that power in the past - and in the present - impacts society in a social and legislative sense.

A political scientist would find unashamed opposition to feminism INTERESTING because it represents the rise of a new political class in opposition to an established order. And that new class is deconstructing the implicit assumptions of feminism and the patriarchy theory by which demonisation of men is justified.

Peon has none of this. He has no inquiring mind and his apprehension of feminism is that of the true believer. The religious nut, not the impartial and interested scientist. He's already said he'd fail a student for thinking outside the box - effectively thinking for themselves - and as a result it's blatantly clear that he's not teaching political science. On the contrary, what he's teaching is doctrine - or if you prefer, dogma.

Now, that's not exactly a surprise and it's partially not his fault. The triumph of ideology over education in British academia has been going on for some time and it's well known that British academics are more interested in turning out students who possess the right ideology rather than the right set of abilities, tools and techniques for success.

quote:


For all the pretension and bluster, you seem unable to specify any point on which Peon's position is false,
That's because he doesn't actually take a position. He simply reverts to a dictionary definition in a vague attempt to hand-wave away the many problematic - and by that I mean misandrist - aspects of feminist ideology.

quote:


even though his understanding of feminism appears to be vastly superior to yours.
You have no justification for making that claim. None. Peon has demonstrated nothing more than a belief that feminism is a dictionary definition. That's about as shallow an understanding as it's possible to have.

quote:


It appears that your idea of feminism is that it's "engaging in constant social and legislative attack upon men" (post #26)
Yes, because that's what feminists are doing. Is that too hard for you to understand?

quote:


because "feminists y'see don't like men that much" (post#5).
Yes, as evidenced in feminist theory where feminism asserts that men are a bunch of monsters. Which part of this is confusing you?

quote:

It's a measure of your arrogance that you attempt to make the women's movement all about men like you. It's not.
No you ditzy bitch, I'm pointing out that when feminism pretends to be inclusive by claiming it's about "equality for all genders" that it's actually a monumental fucking lie. Feminism advocates for further advantages for women. Specifically, white middle-class women. And feminism does not care one whit about men. Period.

quote:

Feminism covers a broad range of allied philosophies/ideologies that advocate for equality of the sexes.
No it doesn't. Feminist theory is fundamentally anti-male by asserting patriarchy theory as their underlying justification for the demonisation of men. By reframing the world as a horror story with men as "the other" who solely possess agency and act upon women as victims, feminism attempts to present the moral justification for male hatred.

In many ways, feminism is hate speech. I think once that's recognised the opportunity for progress will arise.

quote:


It's not about you, not about men in general no matter how much you would like it to be.
Christ you're thick. I've already said feminism is about advocating for further advantages for white women, which part of this discussion are you having difficulty following?

quote:


You simply aren't that important in the great scheme of things.
None of us is, sweet cheeks. What colossal arrogance you possess to think otherwise.

quote:

It's about women improving their lot in life.
Oh yeah - because being part of a protected and privileged class is so fucking hard for you. My heart bleeds. Really. *rolls eyes*

quote:

And given your implacable opposition to feminism, I have to wonder why it is that you find women improving their lot in life so objectionable.
I don't. But feminism is about making society responsible for women's happiness and removing their responsibility for making themselves happy. The victim-hood mantra is sickening - every feminist believes she really could have had a pony if only it wasn't for the damn patriarchy making her life a misery.

In other words, feminism has all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory. And people who believe in conspiracy theories aren't the full quid.

quote:

I also have to wonder why you insist that you know better when people point out the correct meaning of the term 'feminism'


A) Because I do. Duh.

B) Feminism is an ideology and a political movement, not a dictionary definition. Peon's "One True Feminist" fallacy is the way in which modern feminists attempt to avoid dissection and repudiation of their flawed ideology.

quote:

when it's abundantly clear that you don't know better.
Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear. That truly is the pot calling the kettle black.

quote:

I am yet to see any evidence that you know anything at all about feminism.
I'm truly sorry, but I can't compensate for your poor comprehension.

quote:

If you plan on continuing to post on this topic, do yourself a favour and take Peon's advice to learn a little bit about feminism.
My dear, I hazard a guess I know far more about it than either Peon or yourself. In fact, I suspect Nick's knowledge trumps both of you.

quote:

People are far more persuasive when they know what they are talking about.
I'm afraid you don't know what you're talking about. People are more persuasive when they employ charisma. In this forum, I simply don't care. Persuasion is not my goal. Refutation of utter nonsense is my goal.

quote:

On this topic, it is patently clear to any one who does know a little about feminism
Well that wouldn't include you, sweetcheeks.

quote:

that you don't know the first thing about it.
Oh please. Now you're just embarrassing yourself.

< Message edited by Awareness -- 4/14/2016 6:33:14 AM >


_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 7:47:48 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaliko

FR

So, back on the topic of the original post...

NOW is a feminist organization, yes?

This is from the Florida NOW Facebook page, their most recent post:

quote:

ALIMONY BILL
The Governor now has SB668 on his desk. He has 15 days to sign, veto, or let it become law without his signature.
Please call and/or email the Governor ASAP.
This is it! Speak up! Stop this horrible bill from becoming law. The courts should decide child support and alimony terms, not a 1 size fits all law.


This Facebook post is incredibly misleading. The bill is clearly not a one size fits all law. It allows for oodles of provisions to be made based on certain circumstances, including, for example: the length of time the child has lived in a stable school and community environment, length of time to travel to and from school, the mental and physical health of the parents, and the ability to provide a consistent routine for the child.

If NOW is indeed a feminist organization, how is it that they are opposing a bill that begins with equality and then allows considerations based on the actual circumstances? What's to oppose, there?


If NOW is a feminist organization why did they support Bill "you better put some ice on that" Clinton?

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to Kaliko)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 8:29:49 AM   
Awareness


Posts: 3918
Joined: 9/8/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaliko

FR

So, back on the topic of the original post...

NOW is a feminist organization, yes?

This is from the Florida NOW Facebook page, their most recent post:

quote:

ALIMONY BILL
The Governor now has SB668 on his desk. He has 15 days to sign, veto, or let it become law without his signature.
Please call and/or email the Governor ASAP.
This is it! Speak up! Stop this horrible bill from becoming law. The courts should decide child support and alimony terms, not a 1 size fits all law.


This Facebook post is incredibly misleading. The bill is clearly not a one size fits all law. It allows for oodles of provisions to be made based on certain circumstances, including, for example: the length of time the child has lived in a stable school and community environment, length of time to travel to and from school, the mental and physical health of the parents, and the ability to provide a consistent routine for the child.

If NOW is indeed a feminist organization, how is it that they are opposing a bill that begins with equality and then allows considerations based on the actual circumstances? What's to oppose, there?


If NOW is a feminist organization why did they support Bill "you better put some ice on that" Clinton?
Oh, you've got to ask Peon who the "true" feminists are. Apparently a great deal of those feminist organisations and individuals aren't "true" feminists.

I've yet to see him identify one "true" feminist.


_____________________________

Ever notice how fucking annoying most signatures are? - Yes, I do appreciate the irony.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 8:34:43 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

What a pompous lot of nonsense. It's one thing to be condescending from a position of knowledge and authority on a topic. It's quite another thing to attempt to hide one's ignorance of the topic by trying to be condescending and superior.
Let me see if I can shine some light into your uneducated mind.

Political Science, m'dear - once you get past the surface patina of respectability - is about the use of tools and techniques for the acquisition of power. One of the earliest examples of the documentation of political science is Nicollo Machiavelli's "The Prince". A treatise on the acquisition and maintenance of power.

So, it's important to understand that political science operates in a meta context. Done properly it's about understanding the ways in which various movements, ideologies and individuals have acquired - and lost - power.

It is, intrinsically, amoral. True political science is about what works, not what is right. It's about what is expedient, not what is beneficial to the people.

Peon's presentation on feminism is not the viewpoint of a political scientist. Feminism is a political ideology constructed for the explicit purpose of further privileging already-privileged middle class white women. Any political scientist worth their salt would deconstruct the underpinnings of the movement, the presentation of a moral justification for feminism (thus making an attempt to win the moral war), the acquisition of power by feminists and how the use of that power in the past - and in the present - impacts society in a social and legislative sense.

A political scientist would find unashamed opposition to feminism INTERESTING because it represents the rise of a new political class in opposition to an established order. And that new class is deconstructing the implicit assumptions of feminism and the patriarchy theory by which demonisation of men is justified.

Peon has none of this. He has no inquiring mind and his apprehension of feminism is that of the true believer. The religious nut, not the impartial and interested scientist. He's already said he'd fail a student for thinking outside the box - effectively thinking for themselves - and as a result it's blatantly clear that he's not teaching political science. On the contrary, what he's teaching is doctrine - or if you prefer, dogma.

Now, that's not exactly a surprise and it's partially not his fault. The triumph of ideology over education in British academia has been going on for some time and it's well known that British academics are more interested in turning out students who possess the right ideology rather than the right set of abilities, tools and techniques for success.

quote:


For all the pretension and bluster, you seem unable to specify any point on which Peon's position is false,
That's because he doesn't actually take a position. He simply reverts to a dictionary definition in a vague attempt to hand-wave away the many problematic - and by that I mean misandrist - aspects of feminist ideology.

quote:


even though his understanding of feminism appears to be vastly superior to yours.
You have no justification for making that claim. None. Peon has demonstrated nothing more than a belief that feminism is a dictionary definition. That's about as shallow an understanding as it's possible to have.

quote:


It appears that your idea of feminism is that it's "engaging in constant social and legislative attack upon men" (post #26)
Yes, because that's what feminists are doing. Is that too hard for you to understand?

quote:


because "feminists y'see don't like men that much" (post#5).
Yes, as evidenced in feminist theory where feminism asserts that men are a bunch of monsters. Which part of this is confusing you?

quote:

It's a measure of your arrogance that you attempt to make the women's movement all about men like you. It's not.
No you ditzy bitch, I'm pointing out that when feminism pretends to be inclusive by claiming it's about "equality for all genders" that it's actually a monumental fucking lie. Feminism advocates for further advantages for women. Specifically, white middle-class women. And feminism does not care one whit about men. Period.

quote:

Feminism covers a broad range of allied philosophies/ideologies that advocate for equality of the sexes.
No it doesn't. Feminist theory is fundamentally anti-male by asserting patriarchy theory as their underlying justification for the demonisation of men. By reframing the world as a horror story with men as "the other" who solely possess agency and act upon women as victims, feminism attempts to present the moral justification for male hatred.

In many ways, feminism is hate speech. I think once that's recognised the opportunity for progress will arise.

quote:


It's not about you, not about men in general no matter how much you would like it to be.
Christ you're thick. I've already said feminism is about advocating for further advantages for white women, which part of this discussion are you having difficulty following?

quote:


You simply aren't that important in the great scheme of things.
None of us is, sweet cheeks. What colossal arrogance you possess to think otherwise.

quote:

It's about women improving their lot in life.
Oh yeah - because being part of a protected and privileged class is so fucking hard for you. My heart bleeds. Really. *rolls eyes*

quote:

And given your implacable opposition to feminism, I have to wonder why it is that you find women improving their lot in life so objectionable.
I don't. But feminism is about making society responsible for women's happiness and removing their responsibility for making themselves happy. The victim-hood mantra is sickening - every feminist believes she really could have had a pony if only it wasn't for the damn patriarchy making her life a misery.

In other words, feminism has all the hallmarks of a conspiracy theory. And people who believe in conspiracy theories aren't the full quid.

quote:

I also have to wonder why you insist that you know better when people point out the correct meaning of the term 'feminism'


A) Because I do. Duh.

B) Feminism is an ideology and a political movement, not a dictionary definition. Peon's "One True Feminist" fallacy is the way in which modern feminists attempt to avoid dissection and repudiation of their flawed ideology.

quote:

when it's abundantly clear that you don't know better.
Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear. That truly is the pot calling the kettle black.

quote:

I am yet to see any evidence that you know anything at all about feminism.
I'm truly sorry, but I can't compensate for your poor comprehension.

quote:

If you plan on continuing to post on this topic, do yourself a favour and take Peon's advice to learn a little bit about feminism.
My dear, I hazard a guess I know far more about it than either Peon or yourself. In fact, I suspect Nick's knowledge trumps both of you.

quote:

People are far more persuasive when they know what they are talking about.
I'm afraid you don't know what you're talking about. People are more persuasive when they employ charisma. In this forum, I simply don't care. Persuasion is not my goal. Refutation of utter nonsense is my goal.

quote:

On this topic, it is patently clear to any one who does know a little about feminism
Well that wouldn't include you, sweetcheeks.

quote:

that you don't know the first thing about it.
Oh please. Now you're just embarrassing yourself.


This is both technically and philosophically pretty good.

(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/14/2016 9:11:50 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: respectmen

Manspreading



I have to admit that you have a point here. I think the feminists laid an egg on this one.

(in reply to respectmen)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/15/2016 9:27:24 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Awareness

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Feminism covers a broad range of allied philosophies/ideologies that advocate for equality of the sexes.

No it doesn't. Feminist theory is fundamentally anti-male by asserting patriarchy theory as their underlying justification for the demonisation of men. By reframing the world as a horror story with men as "the other" who solely possess agency and act upon women as victims, feminism attempts to present the moral justification for male hatred.



It is in claims such as this that you betray your fundamental ignorance of what feminism is. The term feminism covers a wide range of streams of thought that only have in common that they advance the interests of women and advocate gender equality. They range from liberal feminism to radical lesbian feminism. Many of these streams disagree with others on a variety of issues.

It is more accurate to refer to feminisms, the plural. You continual attempts to reduce the wide range of feminist thinking to a single ideology. definable only by relation to males (as you insist above), demonstrates how unfamiliar you are with the reality of today's third wave feminisms. Just one example: if only men had agency as your 'definition' of feminism asserts, then feminisms couldn't exist as women would be without the necessary agency to invent feminisms. That's a measure of how stupid and internally inconsistent your claims are, and how ridiculously easy they are to dismiss.

Your insistence that you can define feminism(s) and that the womens movement cannot accurately define it self speaks equally to your arrogance and ignorance. Men have never had the right to define feminisms and they never will. That makes as much sense as IS defining democracy ie no sense at all.

You can be as pompous loud, long winded and abusive about it as you like. But it doesn't and can't cover the very obvious fact that you really haven't a clue what feminisms are about. That you are so strident in your opposition to a movement that has improved the standard and quality of life for hundreds of millions of women, if not billions, across the planet suggests that, just like your mate poor little nicki, your real hatred is of women not feminisms, that you cannot cope with the thought and/or the reality of gender equality in today's world. Well suck on it stupid, thanks to feminisms and feminists, the days when men ruled and women listened are long gone and never coming back.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 4/15/2016 9:55:13 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to Nnanji)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/15/2016 10:33:10 AM   
Nnanji


Posts: 4552
Joined: 3/29/2016
Status: offline
It sounds like a pretty little foot just stomped. I don't see anything in the response that refutes any point awareness made.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custod... - 4/15/2016 4:24:42 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline
quote:

Oh, you've got to ask Peon who the "true" feminists are. Apparently a great deal of those feminist organisations and individuals aren't "true" feminists.

I've yet to see him identify one "true" feminist.


Jesus Christ on a giraffe. Well, I'll just have to cite it yet again, so it seems. I don't know why you keep doing this, Awareness .... Why in god's name do you find it so difficult? Oh well.

"the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes"

- Anybody who supports that, per the definition of feminism that you find at the top of the page if you Google 'feminism defined', will help you identify a 'true feminist'. God knows, even your GF might be a feminist, given that. Ask her. But, please, don't get as gobshitey and fuckety fucking aggressive with her as you do with everyone you argue with on this forum on this subject.

The truth is that you, personally, just *must* see 'feminism' in terms of high theory, bogeywoman rantings. If it's not that, then it *cannot* be feminism, in your terms. But feminism went beyond that many, many years ago. Its principles have seeped into the consciousness of millions the world over and have been accepted as true and right so much that even many of those who pronounce themselves non- or even anti- feminists nonetheless utterly accept and live by feminist principles.

Hell's bells ... I honestly do *not* get you, Awareness. You're not an idiot on most subjects. But on this one - of feminism - you somehow get overwhelmed by total cretinism. Really, you should try to stop being a fucking tit on this.

ETA: a 'fucking tit' rather than just 'a tit'.

< Message edited by PeonForHer -- 4/15/2016 4:55:09 PM >


_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to Awareness)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Women's rights groups to rally against equal custody bill Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




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

0.109