You're right, without feminism nobody would have a problem with what he said. Feminists are the only people who pay attention to reality or indeed have ever met any actual women.

Hrm...

"whatever you humanist fuckheads are arguing for"

"I'm sorry, did I trigger you? Did I piss in your safe space? Aww."

Why is it that people that go out of their way to offend suddenly complain when it comes back at them?

I had a pretty reasonable response brewing to the post where you came up with the fuckhead bit, and trashed it because reasonable didn't seem what you were interested in. So why waste my time trying to reason with a person who is unreasonable right?

And hey, that's my presumption. Mebbe I caught you on a bad day, mebbe I'm being the ass here, it's entirely possible.

But this conversation is pretty much as pointless as vocal 3rd wave feminism. It's going around in circles, people occasionally getting mad, and the majority of the sift probably peaked in and decided they couldn't be fucked wading in among the 10 or so people dedicated to perpetuating the "conversation"... And of course it's not really accomplishing anything, we're all still being relatively civil to each other even if a bit terse...

The battle for equality isn't won, but it's pretty close (well, at least in the west, just forget about the majority of the worlds women who still live in conditions that make the 50's seem blissful...). 3rd wavers aren't fighting massive social injustice anymore, they are battling things like #gamergate and feedback against Sarkeesian, Tucker Max or that Return of Kings mob (who seem to be the biggest trolls on the planet but w/e).

Seriously, they are spending a lot of time and energy arguing with the lowest common denominators (who by and large love the attention). There used to be a time you could safely ignore the village idiot because, hey, he's a fucking idiot. Now, any dumbass can post on the internet and people will descend on them like the proverbial plagues of Egypt, followed shortly by supporters showing up. Not because those one offs are indicative of even a significant minority in broader society, but because it generates plenty of online hype to see "some guy" say something fucking awful and then the sides line up to start yelling at each other...

So I'm not overly concerned if we end up agreeing because in the grand scheme of things, it's also fairly pointless. We're both entitled to our opinions and they seem to be vaguely in the same park aka "equality good, hate and oppression bad", seems like a good place to stop.

Japan really is the country feminism forgot.

Just wanted to respond to show that I'm not ignoring this, but mainly just nodding my head. I don't consider myself a feminist, but I think that feminism is needed despite some of the excesses of its adherents, just like I don't consider myself a civil rights activists, but think that it's a needed movement despite some of the excesses of its adherents (I'm too lazy to be either a feminist or a civili rights activist).

I completely agree that the wage gap is real but incredibly hard to isolate, define and quantify, and that a lot of the intended measures to adress it can end up fucking over individuals while failing to adress the core issues. That, to me, means that we have to work smarter and harder, which some economists are doing. I just don't think CHS is the one leading that field forward, unfortunately.

And finally, death threats and threats of violence seem to me like they are almost synonymous with the internet. I find I can't draw any conclusions from the existence of threats of violence online, because if I did I would conclude that the following are all toxic cultures of death and violence: feminism, gaming, conservatism, progressivism, ISIS, Harry Potter, men's rights activism and environmentalism, to mention just a few. Of all of those I'm pretty sure it's only ISIS that actually represents a toxic culture of death.

You don't need to link any angry man-hating feminist videos, and I don't need to link any angry woman-hating videos by people calling themselves humanists while threatening Anita Sarkeesian's life. We both know that they exist, and should ideally agree that this doesn't mean most self-labelled feminists hate men and most self-labelled humanists don't hate women. In fact, the vast majority of feminists and humanists don't even make angry videos on the internet.

Then you go into statistics on rape by men against women outside of prison and rape by men against in prison. This is a fucking horrible cultural phenomenon, and I discussed that. Above. You saw it? Yeah you did. But you wanted to make pretend rape threats instead, which fine, that's your deal, I guess. Nevertheless I can quote myself, again:

"if we concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of women by men outside of prison, I will also concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of men by men in prison. In fact, I'll go ahead and concede that anyway. Which is fucking awful, but doesn't mean that feminists are wrong for railing against the situation outside of prison."

Furthermore - I gave you some quotes specifically showing you good sources of arguments. Not examplesof things men should tolerate or be fine about it. Quite the opposite, in fact. Don't pretend that I said that men should be fine with rape, because I never did. I said that just as white people have the privilege to shrug off inflammatory comments by BLM activists while still respecting the underlying movement, men have the privilege to be able to shrug off some inflammatory comments by feminist activists while still respecting the underlying movement. I am a little surprised that you responded with "I should have some people rape the fuck out of you" but okay, that's how you roll. If you don't want to go back on that comment - we'll just let it stand on its own, I guess.

As for Nicholas Cristakis in the video you link to, there's a shitload to discuss there, but it's much more nuanced and weird than feminism vs whatever.

- There's the weirdness of the role of a 'Master' and what it has come to mean at Yale. While I think the students are being unbearably unbearable, it would be a little different if they did it to a teacher rather than a master, who has a sort of weird guidance counsellor / therapist role. I don't know why that role needs to exist, or what it means in practice normally.
- There's the absolute insufferable pampered entitled gall and rudeness of those students which makes my goddamn blood boil.
- There's the question of racism and cultural appropriation at halloween (which started the whole thing) which to me is both a silly and difficult debate; I'm absolutely disguested by blackface, but I don't really mind if some four-year old white or black or hispanic girl wants to dress up as Mulan.
- There's the issue of job security in the academic world and what kind of protection Christakis has from fallout over a perfectly reasonable letter his wife wrote...

Those are all interesting, I agree, but I don't see what the video has to do with this one.

Feel free to be specific, and not just coy and vague. Which parts were intended as 'tongue in cheek' - was it linking to right wing activist blogs? I am truthfully and honestly unsure, because we don't know each other - for some people, quoting CHS would be a joke, similar to quoting Anne Coulter, and for others it's a valid source. I still don't know which, if either, opinion you hold.

Trust me, I will happily and heartily chuckle at your wry, irascible tongue in cheek wit, if you can tell me which parts you thought you were being tongue in cheek about, and what your serious arguments are.

As to whether Christina Hoff Sommers is a feminist or not, I would guess that it's not as easy as just calling yourself a feminist. I can call myself a conservative, but the evidence is against me: I never vote conservative, I typically espouse progressive views, and I usually criticize flaws in conservative thought and policy, comparing it unfavorably to progressive thought. I think a reasonable person would have to say that I'm either being disingenuous if I call myself a conservative, or that I'm very very bad at it.

I don't get to decide what CHS calls herself, but as a rational person I have to look at her argument and see if it's based in feminism or in something entirely different, and make up my own mind about it regardless of labels.

As for the rest, I'm not sure, again, which parts you say are just straw manning it up and which parts we agree on. I thought we had some disagreements but you might have been tongue in cheek about all of it, for all I know.

For example, I thought we were in agreement on this: "so the situation is not some cut and dried situation,and there are extreme elements of any social movement,but those elements should not invalidate the message" - so I didn't comment on that part. It makes sense to me, and unless you were being tongue in cheek, we're in agreement.

I thought we came to an agreement (?) on the prevalence of rape and the need to look at the whole picture, but also agreed (?) that there are several other disheartening factors at work in the so-called justice system.

I thought, however, that we disagreed about your entire first point (both about how making discrimination illegal should eliminate the wage gaps, and about how no serious economists cite it). This is where I thought CHS was a poor rebuttal - regardless of her right wing activism, she's certainly not an economist; she's a philosopher by education, and not a particularly credible source on the economy. Again, if you were being tongue in cheek when quoting her I'll just erase that part and assume that we agree.

As for contradictory evidence, I can't swear that I'll be influenced by it, and I certainly won't accept it uncritically - we all have a hard time breaking down our own biases. But I'll happily and gratefully read it, as I assume you will too.

Oops. Sorry. A well formatted post does not a correct argument make....it did look nice though. ;-)

You are incorrect, the majority of ACTIVE feminists today DO make derogatory, often actionably libelous statements about men. They have absolutely taken over as the voice of 'feminism', and real Feminists (like myself) find them disgusting and actually worse than those they rail against, because they are complaining about something while trying to become that thing at the same time. They don't want to end inequality, they just want to be on the side with more power.

Your' 'bullet points' have been 'destroyed' by @enoch...so I'll ignore them....except to say FUCK YOU BUDDY, because men ARE raped MORE than women, but your answer...."We can pretty much take it; we as a group already have most of the money, most of the privilege, and most of the presidents. We don't need a safe space." What utterly ridiculous, short sighted, unthinking bullshit.
I should have Babette and friends come by and rape the fuck out of you with a broom handle, then see how your 'safe space' makes it all just go away. Perhaps then you might see the ridiculousness of your statement.

First of all, statistics aren't a game Not all of the internet is about being a tough guy winner, and sometimes some of us are just trying to explain ourselves.

Secondly, I'm not giving you links because I like links, but because I like sources. Not all sources are equal. A blog post by a conservative think tank employee and right wing activist isn't as neutral as the CDC or the US Census. Nothing is 100% 'neutral', but numbers gathered by the Labor Department are a little more transparent than a blog post by Christina Hoff Sommers. Say what you will about her, but her agenda is always very clear.

Thirdly, can you clarify your point about illegal discrimination? I don't think anybody talked about illegal discrimination, just the actual wage gap. Illegal discrimination is not necessary to establish oppression - nobody is illegally preventing women from becoming president, but we still have a historic gender gap in the oval office. Things can be shitty and in need of change even if it nothing currently illegal is going on (like the pew research polling you linked to shows). Illiteracy, for example, is a shitty phenomenon for citizens and bad for democracy, but it's not illegal; the wage gap is bad for citizens and for democracy, even when it is not illegal.

Fourthly, if you are willing to accept that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of women by men outside of prison, I will also concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of men by men in prison. In fact, I'll go ahead and concede that anyway. Which is fucking awful, but doesn't mean that feminists are wrong for railing against the situation outside of prison. The are two different sectors of society, and the factors that create a rape culture in one sector do not apply so much in the other. Still awful though.

fifthly, you ended on some stuff which might just have been random thoughts, because I don't see how they fit in anywhere:

"[the existence of self-perpetuating unjust power structures] does not automatically equate to men getting a free ride" - was not said by me, ever. We should get rid of injustice even if not all men get a free ride, I think

"in fact i would posit that this obnoxious behavior works against the very thing they are trying to convey" - can be said about all sorts of uppity oppressed groups

"this woman has received death threats and threats of physical violence from other feminists!" - doesn't make her right, and it doesn't make her wrong, and it doesn't 'ruin' all of feminism.

"at the end of the day this is actually a human issue,and a valid one and we all have a right to our own opinion,but not a right to impose it upon another. feel free to disagree." ...nobody can disagree with this because it means nothing. It's a Hallmark card. I tried to give you actual facts and you countered with "we are all humans so everything is like, always a human issue and like, opinions, man."

@Babymech

are we playing the numbers/statistic game?
oh goodie../claps hands
i love these games.
can i play?

since i actually agree that mens issues are different than womens in certain cases,and that you recognize that the "patriarchy" affects men as well as women.i see no reason to address something we both agree on.

so we can agree the base premise is "power vs powerlessness",and that women have a right to address this power structure,just like men do,because BOTH suffer under its influence.

but then you posted some tasty links for our enjoyment,and then made the specious claim that this somehow made your argument MORE valid.

ok..lets play by YOUR standards shall we?

1.the gender pay gap,which before 1962 may have been a valid argument,but since it is ILLEGAL to discriminate in that way in regards to pay,and if true would translate to waaay more women in the workplace (because corporations love them some dirt cheap labor).so why is this trope still trotted out?why is it given so much validity as being born as fact?when no serious economist ever sites this disparity,yet so many keep regurgitating this gap is being a real thing?

well,i will just let a feminist economist break it down for you:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christina-hoff-sommers/wage-gap_b_2073804.html

see? just got me one of them fancy links you like so much.

2.political power in regards to gender.well,i cant argue the statistics.there ARE more men in politics,but what your link fails to do is ask a very basic question:why?why are there more men than women?

pew research addresses that question,and is fairly in line with your link:http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/01/14/women-and-leadership/

3.as for who suffers from the most sexual violence.well,according to your link which uses cdc numbers,women suffer far more,BUT (and is the statistic that the women in my video pointed out) when you include prison (which the cdc did not) that number flips on its head:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2449454/More-men-raped-US-women-including-prison-sexual-abuse.html

so the situation is not some cut and dried situation,and there are extreme elements of any social movement,but those elements should not invalidate the message.

just like this woman in my video is not dismissing feminism,she is disagreeing with feminisms more extreme authoritarian bullies,who because they scream louder and are more controversial..get more attention,but that does not make their position MORE important just because they are louder and more obnoxious.

in fact i would posit that this obnoxious behavior works against the very thing they are trying to convey.

we can all agree that we all want equality,fairness and justice and the current,and historical power structures,have always sought to retain and even further their own power.which has been traditionally held by men,but this does not automatically equate to men getting a free ride,quite the opposite.

so women absolutely have a right to challenge this power structure,just as men do.what they do NOT have a right to is imposing their ideologies upon me,or this woman in my video.

this woman has received death threats and threats of physical violence from other feminists! just because she had the audacity to disagree with their position.

at the end of the day this is actually a human issue,and a valid one and we all have a right to our own opinion,but not a right to impose it upon another.

feel free to disagree.

There are BLM activists who make inflammatory comments about white people (oh no whatever shall we do) and there are feminists who make inflammatory comments about men (oh no whatever shall we do). I posit, for your reasoned consideration:

Congratulations! Your video, woman destroys third wave feminism in 3 minutes, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 20 Badge!

Well, if a majority of the 'black lives matter' people normally chanted 'death to whitey', 'all white people are rapists', 'Anyone who's skin is not brown is evil', etc, especially if they then used their group to harass and quash any dissent, I don't think they would get much support either.
So the fact that men suffer from most, if not all of the issues 'feminists' claim are forced on them solely BY men, almost to the same extent, or to GREATER extents while being completely ignored and actually blamed IS a reasonable argument against today's brand of anti male 'feminism'.
It is not a reasonable argument against equality...but that's no longer what 'feminism' is about.

Why is it that the Videosift crowd is generally competent enough to call bullshit on "no, all lives matter"-rhetoric, but not enough to see through this type of nonsense? It's the exact same fallacy - yes, men do suffer in modern society, and yes, white people are mistreated by cops, but that's not a reasonable argument against feminism or against Black Lives Matter.

There's a decent quote by Anatole France on this kind of simpleminded 'equality in name only': "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." Trying to create equality on paper, and be color-blind or gender-blind or money-blind or whatever you humanist fuckheads are arguing for, just cements the actual inequalities in society, all because you don't want to 'focus on differences'.

I don't know about feminism in the US, but where I live, the feminist movement was started by women who couldn't vote, couldn't go to school, couldn't work, had no rights when they married, and there were zero family rights. These women were able to resolve most of these issues by fighting for many years. YES, it was about equality... They should be admired for their dedication, not slurred.

So a very large part of the work has been done. The last remaining battles being at the workplace and in the media. I get that some people think feminism is not needed anymore . But to me this lady in the video is annoyingly only looking at the snapshot of today's media depiction of feminism.

Of course, she can say now "I don't need feminism", after all the work has been done by her grandmothers .

P.S What the hell is it about comparing rape statitics between men and women ? Does't make any sense to me.