Nice title PB. Tell us how you really feel.

Ok. PB.

I am downvoting this. I don't normally explain my downvotes, but I think you are sifting this because you want to invite discussion and point out what a fucking moron this guy is... which I agree. But I find his argument so poorly framed, that I bring myself to vote for it, even for the sake of discussion.

He's absolutely correct.

Feminism is also very much responsible for the deprecation of solid family values and the past generations of neglected children.

Men and women serve DIFFERENT roles in society. Equally important, but different.

mycroftholmes - i can respect that

pprt - i demand you give examples. and that the examples not be cases of mentally ill women neglecting and endangering their families.

i would never say my role is not different than any mans role. but my role is also different from my friends that are married mothers. or my friends that are married without kids. or my friends that are single and plan to stay that way. we ALL fill different roles. and at different times in our lives.

Ugh. Just ugh.

I think his "analysis" of the IQ bell curves bothered me the most. For one thing, if you're going to assert that the smartest people in the world are men because their IQ curve is "spread out more" (higher standard deviation), it is only fair to note that that must apply to the bottom end of the curve also. Ie., the stupidest people in the world would tend to be men also. Case in point, author of the video.

>> ^peggedbea:
mycroftholmes - i can respect that
pprt - i demand you give examples. and that the examples not be cases of mentally ill women neglecting and endangering their families.
i would never say my role is not different than any mans role. but my role is also different from my friends that are married mothers. or my friends that are married without kids. or my friends that are single and plan to stay that way. we ALL fill different roles. and at different times in our lives.


Sorry, I indeed misspoke. What I meant is that feminism is largely responsible for enabling mothers to neglect their roles.

It's indisputable that there's a sizable portion of the female population that considers their professional career as important as their family. While this statement seems benign and commonplace, I take issue with the comparative.

Even if career women publicly maintain that their family is their priority, the way they spend their time indicates otherwise. I'd sooner respect and admire a woman that says her family is the most important aspect of her life and dedicated herself accordingly.

While it's easy to say that the cost of living has risen that that a single revenue can't adequately provide for a family, it's just an excuse.. a justification.. all but an acknowledgement that women (read mothers) today are all but forced to enter the marketplace and find employ.

Meanwhile, children still in diapers are frequently dumped in the hands of poorly educated, minimum-age earning babysitters. This is a tragic start-of-life event for a child. While Northeners admire the "strong family values" of Hispanics, Asiatics, Dravidians et al., we seem to ignore that those mothers are traditionally totally involved in their children's lives from birth until they leave home. This creates a bond not usually found in European-based societies.

While, as you say, single women without children are certainly free to pursue whatever endeavor (it'd be medieval otherwise). I find sympathy in the concept that when a woman becomes a mother, her role in society changes. Then again, people are entitled to do anything they like with their lives.

I am standing by the observation, however, that feminism has ruptured the core of the traditional family. Not to mention other social turbulence.

I don't know guys, I think this dude just got dumped really really hard

Women earn .75 to the dollar compared to men with the SAME JOBS.

IQ is not an good experiment. You can't be serious. The same sort of pseudoscience is used to justify discrimination all over the world. The IQ test only shows that the test is biased towards white people. Major overhauls of the current IQ test are the subject of a significant amount of research.

This guy completely ignores the role of social pressures. In most modern societies, women are discouraged by there own families from persuing science.

I shut it down at men in tougher jobs for more money. That, and I can't stand people who understand English enough to use words like chagrin properly, but can't be bothered to pronounce it properly.

This is the problem with the internet: it has turned every fucking retard on the planet into an expert.

Yes, that means you.

pprt - so in other words you have zero evidence to support your claims. other than the notion of strong intelligent women pursuing careers outside the home offends and threatens your dinosaur mind.

hows this for you, ancient hunter/gatherer cultures were structured in an egalitarian fashion. women and men while serving different roles were seen as equally important and shared more or less equal amounts of power. they worshipped both male and female dieties. it wasnt until the evolution into agrarian societies with womens role being focused more on the home and domestic duities and less on food cultivation that the power structure shifted, as well as shift to worshipping mostly male dieties. and this of course eventually evolved into modern monotheistic relgions and the notion of original sin and an obsession with feminine submissiveness and sexual chastity, bondage.

what is this idea that none of the women with iqs over 100 are feminists?
total fucking bullshit.

Social equality is not the mathematical term of equity.

I looked into this a few years ago. I think this video has liberal helpings of LAME ASS STATISTICS.

I did find some evidence to support the type of jobs men take generally pay more - but I also found lots of evidence that there was still a very real wage gap for equivalent performance/roles. So if you are going to bring behavior of a female to tend to toward comfortable jobs, then you have to bring in the tendency of males to make a given workplace their dominion - and try and own it. And then you have to ask, ok how much of that is biological, and how much is cultural? And then you gotta ask, who cares if a man has a biological predisposition to attempt to own a given situation - doesn't make it right.

So in the end, you have to actively strive for equivalence between two distinct groups - not equity. And because both groups are different, you are never going to just hit balance - and relax, you are always going to have "feminists", or "dad clubs" or whatever attempting to keep the balance.

But Im not going to bother getting into an argument.

>> ^peggedbea:
pprt - so in other words you have zero evidence to support your claims. other than the notion of strong intelligent women pursuing careers outside the home offends and threatens your dinosaur mind.


Try to be receptive instead of saying other people have "dinosaur minds".

All I'm saying is that, in general, women 100 years ago spent more time with their family. I don't think evidence is required to back that up.

I'm also stating that the impetus of having mothers increasingly involved in the workforce has far-reaching sociological impacts. This seems rather self-evident.

Feel free to dig around for "evidence" that having mothers give up their children as soon as they leave the teat has no ramifications.

As for wage differences... not the the civilized world. I do NOT believe for a second that a female graphic designer, for instance, would earn 25% less than a male equivalent. Yeah, perhaps women earn less on average, but it's because of their fields of employment. Woman have less of an edge in certain domains, and few of them have the ruthlessness it often takes to get to the top. Only affirmative action could mend the income gap.

interesting

imho, i think this video adds some perspective (watch all 8 parts)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cb_6v-JQ13Q&feature=related

I can't upvote or downvote this really.

But I do agree feminism is bad.

Those stick figure chicks got nice tits.

One line sticks out for me:

"Once equity is reached, furthering the welfare of one interest group can only occur at the detriment of another."

Of course, this goes for lots of other groups as well. Any movement that carries its ideals too fanatically will inevitably cross that line.

sure, FANATICALLY. anything fanatical or strictly fundamental general will not turn out well.

the problem is he is speaking more about the whole of women. his argument is terribly structured. his facts are poorly thought out and skewed.

it makes me so mad i would rather just spit than argue.

pprt - being a feminist does not imply that you "give up your children as soon as they leave the teat"
how about the shift in household attitudes, where dads are now becoming MORE involved with the housework and child rearing than they were 100 years ago. what are the societal impacts on that?? children are still being taken care of. society is structured differently than it was 100 years ago. moms dont have to spend hours making clothing, it doesnt take hours to wash the clothes or the dishes or prepare meals anymore. household responsibilities just dont take as along anymore. and all american children are in school during the day. you cant cling to a century old societal model as your argument and then complain when i call your argument archaic.

p.s. i stayed home with my kids until my son was 3 and a half and ready for more social interaction and montesorri school and my daughter went off to kindergarten. i got a job that allowed me to work only weekends and only in the middle of the night. i spent 5 days a week as a stay at home mom, they spent the night with gramma the nights i was at work then came home for lunch, nap, dinner and bath with mom, then back to spend the night with gramma. not a bad system and i dont think society will suffer for it.

FURTHERMORE
just 110 years ago america was in the height of the industrial revolution and the number of women at work in factories and sweat shops in working class urban areas was astounding. and where do you think their children were? off to work as early as 6. what do you think the societal impacts were? fuck this idealistic view of history.

I'm upvoting because I agree with the title, not because the video is good.

If feminism is the shorthand name for the movement to empower women to achieve any role in society they choose, to liberate them from gender-based social expectations, and eliminate gender discrimination I'm for it.

If feminism is about hating men for being evil, I'm not for it.

This guy seems to be making a very libertarian critique of feminism. It's not that we pay women less because they're women, it's because women as a gender-class have been judged less capable by the free market, and therefore don't deserve anything other than what they've already got.

He should just take the next logical step and get all the way there -- clearly anti-discrimination laws are immoral, because people should be free to pay whoever they want whatever they want, as long as it's "voluntary". If the reasons are flawed, surely the free market will figure that out.

*terrible

Adding video to channels (Terrible) - requested by NetRunner.

>> ^Pprt:
It's indisputable that there's a sizable portion of the female population that considers their professional career as important as their family. While this statement seems benign and commonplace, I take issue with the comparative.

It is also indisputable that a sizable portion of the female population is made up of single mothers who alone provide for their family.

It would follow that since a good career is the best way to provide for a family, that a career woman would want to make the most of her time and effort in the business world, instead of maybe cleaning hotel rooms, begging on the street, or marrying the first guy that comes along.

Feminism is not responsible for any downward trend in the overall quality of life.

However, forcing women to live according to your petty, dickless, antediluvian principles probably is.

Dishes. Do them.

I used to have the same opinion, but my now fiance set me straight. Unfortunately, we are victim to the medias redefinition of the word feminism. Many people understand feminism as meaning something that it actually does not.

Feminism means equal rights for women.

not

Feminism means advancing rights of women.

Distinct social groups who are discriminated against have to fight for equal rights, because certainly the majority won't. Saying Feminism is bad = "I don't think a woman's vote should count as much as a man's". You, I presume, think that is stupid, which it assuredly is, but it is the same thing.

for further reading


In reply to this comment by Darkhand:
I can't upvote or downvote this really.

But I do agree feminism is bad.

Haha. This should be in the documentaries channel. Sexism is hilarious.