Why I'm Not A "Feminist"

[Debater Slayer]

Based on....scripture and life.

So not science, logic, or actual statistics. Thanks for confirming my impression of the origin of your views.

So you care about women not men then

I care about women and men. It's not a dichotomy where caring for one gender means you have to exclude the other.

then you are not bothered about men, even if you say you are. You mention your boys, but that is your family

Mystic is more than capable of speaking for herself, but I just want to say that you are dead wrong. You seem to have a skewed view of what being "bothered about men" entails. No matter how much you keep saying otherwise, I think that what you are arguing for is chauvinistic male supremacism and not men's rights at all.

 

[Robert.Evans]

So not science, logic, or actual statistics. Thanks for confirming my impression of the origin of your views.

that would be included in life, I didn't realise you wanted an essay

I care about women and men. It's not a dichotomy where caring for one gender means you have to exclude the other.

if you are feminist you are feminist, that is it

Mystic is more than capable of speaking for herself, but I just want to say that you are dead wrong. You seem to have a skewed view of what being "bothered about men" entails. No matter how much you keep saying otherwise, I think that what you are arguing for is chauvinistic male supremacism and not men's rights at all.

I think the one who has a "skewed" view is you not me. We have roles nor rights, we keep the commandments of God, not what we want. We all answer eventually.

 

[Revoltingest]

We have roles nor rights, we keep the commandments of God, not what we want. We all answer eventually.

While I disagree, this is a clearly stated position, & I understand your perspetive.
If anyone wants to debate your views on Xian dictates, that would be for another thread.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

that would be included in life, I didn't realise you wanted an essay

if you are feminist you are feminist, that is it

I think the one who has a "skewed" view is you not me. We have roles nor rights, we keep the commandments of God, not what we want. We all answer eventually.

Except that not everyone is Christian.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

We have roles nor rights, we keep the commandments of God, not what we want. We all answer eventually.

That is the voice of patriarchy, folks.

We all have roles to fulfill. What is this talk of rights? A man is supposed to be a man. He is to support his family, provide them with food and shelter and be dutiful to those who are in authority over him even if that means going off to war. He is not supposed to be nurturing (that is the woman's duty), he is supposed to provide discipline and structure to his family. He is the primary breadwinner, not his wife but him. Any failure to fulfilled any part of this role means he is a failure as a man. He has failed his family, his country and foremost his God.

Many of you men are trapped in this role. If you truly want men's rights and if you truly want men to be free and liberated from oppression and prejudice then break free from that role.

 

[Alceste]

That is the voice of patriarchy, folks.

We all have roles to fulfill. What is this talk of rights? A man is supposed to be a man. He is to support his family, provide them with food and shelter and be dutiful to those who are in authority over him even if that means going off to war. He is not supposed to be nurturing (that is the woman's duty), he is supposed to provide discipline and structure to his family. He is the primary breadwinner, not his wife but him. Any failure to fulfilled any part of this role means he is a failure as a man. He has failed his family, his country and foremost his God.

Many of you men are trapped in this role. If you truly want men's rights and if you truly want men to be free and liberated from oppression and prejudice then break free from that role.

But think of the perks! You get to keep a dependent woman at your beck and call like a some kind of exotic pet, and you get to take whatever you want from all the others because it's what they deserve for catching your eye. You don't have to be able to explain or defend your decisions because whatever you say goes in the house, and you don't have to MAKE any difficult decisions in the greater world, because you can simply obey whoever is in charge of doing the deciding. It's win / win: zero personal accountability.

 

[Robert.Evans]

That is the voice of patriarchy, folks.

And therefore this must be the voice of matriarchy folks.

We all have roles to fulfill. What is this talk of rights?

you think you do not have a role?

A man is supposed to be a man.

a man is a man

He is to support his family, provide them with food and shelter and be dutiful to those who are in authority over him even if that means going off to war.

you think he should not support his family then? It is a poor man and woman that would not do that. We should not kill, so I cannot agree with the last one, however much you might think you know who I am

He is not supposed to be nurturing (that is the woman's duty), he is supposed to provide discipline and structure to his family. He is the primary breadwinner, not his wife but him.

The woman has the better ability than the man, so why should we put the man in a position where he may not be suited. What is the gain? Women having power perhaps? Is that your motive? What is wrong with discipline? There is little in the gangs in London that rape young girls. I doubt if many of them have fathers, thanks to the rise of feminism. But is it obvious that women do not look at the other side when they go in search of their freedom and power. What is wrong with the man being the primary bread winner.

Any failure to fulfilled any part of this role means he is a failure as a man. He has failed his family, his country and foremost his God.

He has failed no one. He can only have what is given him. It is important that both genders work for the betterment of the human race. This is not fulfilled by casting off our responsibilities just for power and wealth, under the guise of feminism.

Many of you men are trapped in this role. If you truly want men's rights and if you truly want men to be free and liberated from oppression and prejudice then break free from that role.

There is no 'rights'. We have roles. Rights are given by those who wish to control. The man and woman are supposed to be one, each using their skills to better the situation that they are within. Anything that helps society be better has to be good. Women having jobs that means men have none, and, at a lower working class level, may increase crime, is not good. To ignore this is wrong. It leads to many things, including violence. Instead of looking for power and wealth all the time, why not speak out at the wars that still go in the world. It appears to me that those who attack men are not better than those who attack women. You turn into the thing you hate. I guess that is why women dress so much like them now.

 

[Robert.Evans]

But think of the perks! You get to keep a dependent woman at your beck and call like a some kind of exotic pet,

this sounds like insecurity and misandry folks. Some might say that is obvious man hating, I wonder why no one sees it? Is it because you are a woman?

and you get to take whatever you want from all the others because it's what they deserve for catching your eye. You don't have to be able to explain or defend your decisions because whatever you say goes in the house, and you don't have to MAKE any difficult decisions in the greater world, because you can simply obey whoever is in charge of doing the deciding. It's win / win: zero personal accountability.

Yep, some might well say that's insecurity with a whole lot of hate and anger. That is sure going to help society.

 

[Robert.Evans]

But think of the perks! You get to keep a dependent woman at your beck and call like a some kind of exotic pet, and you get to take whatever you want from all the others because it's what they deserve for catching your eye. You don't have to be able to explain or defend your decisions because whatever you say goes in the house, and you don't have to MAKE any difficult decisions in the greater world, because you can simply obey whoever is in charge of doing the deciding. It's win / win: zero personal accountability.

Perhaps we should think of the perks of the woman being out of the house, as it seems it is ok for you to do it, hey, lets call it equality: you get a whole pile of money and power, you get the man's job, he's on the scrap heap, being an idiot he wont notice it. You don't need him, so more adultery can be committed. If he flips and does anything after you take the kids seeing you don't need him anymore (served his purpose eh) then you can just blame him. Yep, that's a sin sin situation.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

But think of the perks! You get to keep a dependent woman at your beck and call like a some kind of exotic pet, and you get to take whatever you want from all the others because it's what they deserve for catching your eye. You don't have to be able to explain or defend your decisions because whatever you say goes in the house, and you don't have to MAKE any difficult decisions in the greater world, because you can simply obey whoever is in charge of doing the deciding. It's win / win: zero personal accountability.

Yup. No personal accountability and you get to live life like a good soldier obeying your marching orders...or more like a robot obeying your programming.

 

[CynthiaCypher]

The woman has the better ability than the man, so why should we put the man in a position where he may not be suited.

That is not true. That is not true at all.

 

[Robert.Evans]

That is not true. That is not true at all.

really? The man is just as equally good at bringing up a child? I don't think so. You are misleading yourself I think. Try sticking with reality

 

[CynthiaCypher]

really? The man is just as equally good at bringing up a child? I don't think so. You are misleading yourself I think. Try sticking with reality

Oh yes they are just as equally good as a woman in nurturing a child. I should know, my ex-husband is playing with our kids right in front of me. And he is one of the most loving and nurturing men I know.

Men not only can be nurturing, men are nurturing. Nature does dictate that men are not nurturing. Society imposes that standard upon men. And some men just keep blindly obeying that assigned role without even questioning why.

 

[Riverwolf]

So if evil does not apply to the Gods, then does evil come from?

It's a human concept. It applies to humans, and humans alone. Good and evil also don't exist in nature.

It comes from our nature as a social species, and later it came from our newfound technological power.

You know? With great power comes great responsibility.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

really? The man is just as equally good at bringing up a child? I don't think so. You are misleading yourself I think. Try sticking with reality

Yeah...Why wouldn't they?

 

[Riverwolf]

I know you will think it old fashioned; but why did they need it? Did not the man represent them?

No. Women can, and should, represent themselves.

If the two are one flesh in marriage,

That is, on the marriage bed.

then why do they both have to speak and say the same words?

Because they won't always agree.

I know of a long-time married couple that certainly has different political opinions, and so almost certainly vote differently. They're still together, and their relationship is in absolutely NO danger.

Now you will say that not all are married. That is the point...at least in part

Marriage is not needed for a person to be happy and whole.

 

[Riverwolf]

I'll be honest and say I don't know what your saying. I get the general picture, your in favour of women not men

What makes you think a person can't be in favor of both equally?

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Oh yes they are just as equally good as a woman in nurturing a child. I should know, my ex-husband is playing with our kids right in front of me. And he is one of the most loving and nurturing men I know.

Men not only can be nurturing, men are nurturing. Nature does dictate that men are not nurturing. Society imposes that standard upon men. And some men just keep blindly obeying that assigned role without even questioning why.

Careful, because you mentioned the word "men", this post is going to be seen as male-bashing.

In spite of the fact that you insist that men are just as good as caregivers as women.

Mark my words.

 

[Riverwolf]

"equal"? In what way? If he was in favour of men and women, he would not keep defending women

Women are the ones your arguments attack, not men. Why defend what's not attacked?

 

[Riverwolf]

Where does "male supremacist" come from? Is the hammer the same as the chisel? Perhaps you argue that the hammer is greater as it strikes the chisel, but does not the chisel leave the marks? Where is the equality? Are they not different? If you same they are equal, then I would not like to borrow your tools

Men and women are both humans.

The tool analogy would be like different high-quality brands of hammer, but still both high-quality hammers.