What up Sup Forums, I'm an amateur journalist who recently attended a debate on feminism and was inspired to created pic related. I won't post the link so I don't get spammed out, but I'll ask you about it here!
What are your opinions/responses to the questions? Do you feel more questions should be added before this is released to my followers and social media? Thanks!
Other urls found in this thread:
docs.google.com
dtic.mil
youtu.be
docs.google.com
billmuehlenberg.com
youtube.com
historyatkingston.wordpress.com
slate.com
books.google.com.br
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
Bump?
Alright, I'll bite
1. First wave was alright. They were respectful women who were actually fighting for equal rights and equality. Not this steaming pile of shit that third wave feminism has turned into. It's not about equality anymore and is about destroying men, their reputation and their work.
2. No, and I can't because that would be associating with those who are trying to destroy the progress of those who came before them.
3. N/A
4. Yes, because (and some modern feminists are seeing this themselves) they are actually doing significant damage to their own movement by doing the typical leftist thing and pandering to the minority of their groups and letting them take over and change the meaning of their message. There isn't a unified front anymore and the crazies get the most media attention.
5. It's sad to see something that some worked so hard and fought for being overrun by entitled individuals who are perpetually offended by minor things and seem to hold ideas that go against thousands of years of biology itself. Not everyone is equal and there are things that certain people are better suited for. It's just a fact of life.
I am an ex feminist. I gave it up after feminists decided women should be in combat positions. That is batshit and will get people killed. Also I realized feminism was largely based on a hatred of men which is not helpful or productive. Many young feminists have been victims of abuse so it’s understandable they have a fear/dislike of men, but it shouldn’t get carried thru the whole movement. Lastly feminism denigrates traditional female roles which is unhelpful when most women are drawn to those roles naturally
Thanks for replying! I've got some further discussion to have if that's ok?
1) I agree with you somewhat, the feminism happening in other countries (Eg middle east) is still really significant, though I would hesitate to call it 'third wave'!
2) I agree but doesn't the ideology stand on it's own merits?
4) I definitely agree that the pandering to the radical/extreme minorities is undermining feminism, but I personally think a better response there would be to 'purge' the people who are trying to appropriate the movement in a regressive manner, as that isn't really feminism. That's misandry, or worse.
5) I agree absolutely, biology is biology, but if the people of either sex meet a minimum criteria (e.g baseline military fitness test) they should be given the job. Equality of opportunity is important and I personally would like to see it that way.
Thanks for adding to the conversation!
This is what I was just talking about! If women meet a base fitness requirement, should they not be viewed as a valid candidate? I don't want the requirements changing, though, that's totally reckless. I don't agree that feminism is *based* on a hatred of men, but it's definitely being stolen by people to that end. Traditional female roles are absolutely fine when chosen of your own accord, but it's hard to deny the role society has in encouraging young women to give up their hopes in favour of that!
Thanks!
Is this bait? This is some advanced bait...
Sorry, nope! I'm planning on writing an article about this using the data I gather! Care to respond yourself?
A random feminist wouldn't know what bait means...
I wouldn't say I was one! I attended a debate, but that doesn't mean I'm a feminist. I'm a journalist! I attended it to report on it for my university, but was inspired to create something independent too.
>OP hides behind European flag
>OP tries to bump his own thread
>OP then samefags to respond to his own OP
>OP doesnt know hes a known shill
>I'm an amateur journalist
>this is released to my followers and social media?
This is what you do for a living. Keep that in mind. Remember that talk we had a few weeks back? Don't stay up too long.
I can post without the flag too if you really want. I bumped my own thread on purpose, and I'm not samefagging. I could screenshot but you wouldn't believe me!
They're keeping the thread alive so Sup Forums will raid the google form with inflammatory answers.
OP, you're going to have to try harder.
>I can post without the flag too if you really want.
>European to British
I can already see where this is going.
>I bumped my own thread on purpose
You can't bump it when you're the last poster, genius.
>I could screenshot but you wouldn't believe me!
Do I need to post samefag guides here to show you how easy it is?
>raiding a honeypot
Why don't you stick to answering OPs little survery instead of sticking up for them?
Oops, forgot to reply to the last couple.
What am I shilling here? It's a couple questions. I'm an amateur journalist, I study journalism and run a blog on the side.
Not sure why you'd raid it when I can just delete shitty responses, lol. Plus, as said, if you raided it properly it's google so..
Where what is going? I didn't know that, thanks! I just lurk, this is only my second post! I mean you could if you wanted but I'm not really interested? I know it wouldn't be impossible to samefag, but it wouldn't serve much purpose, you'll never believe I'm not unless I'm replying to you!
>but it wouldn't serve much purpose, you'll never believe I'm not unless I'm replying to you!
You are posting a 'serious' survey on a containment board. What's stopping you now?
You're not going to receive sincere answers. This isn't one of those threads where everyone is calling each other a shill. This is a thread where the OP makes pol answer for itself. As if the limited number of posters here can you tell you how pol thinks and feels about rights, morals, etc
There are better places to discuss this. Places that aren't as dead.
I figured you guys would be better than b or r9k for not being trolled, I didn't think it was that bad here.
I've had a couple of sincere answers in the thread! I'm not really trying to do the article 'on pol' I just wanted data that represented both sides of the spectrum, if that makes sense?
Any places you recommend, from either side? I'll add a thank you note to you to the bottom of the article if I get good results!
In terms of military, women don’t meet the fitness requirements in numbers great enough to warrant their inclusion. However the reasons for not putting women on the front line relate to the disruption of the squad dynamic. The Israelis tried it, they wrote a report about all the things that went wrong but of course you will no longer find any mention of it on the net. The main issue was that men have a protective instinct over women and went nuts when a female squad member was wounded. Also when captured, the women were sexually assaulted and the assaults put over a loud speaker for the male pows to hear. It was rather bad for morale. None of this means that women don’t have the ‘right’ to go into combat, it just means that when you’re dealing with peoples lives, you can’t wave away reality with academic feminist rhetoric.
As for it being based on a hatred of men, that’s in my experience studying feminism at uni, there was an angry undercurrent that painted all men as aggressors.
As for traditional female roles, there is definitely a move to ridicule stay at home mothers as second best to a career woman. This in turn has denigrated motherhood, which is a vital fundamental role that I think should be respected more
That makes sense, I hadn't heard of that report until just then so will do some research myself to see if I can dig it up. If not I'll have to take it with a pinch of salt, but it's not unbelievable.
That's upsetting, but I do agree that feminism in universities can be awful. The promotion of buzzfeed-brand tumblr feminism that's so wildly popular and makes every issue gendered (e.g, manspreading, mansplaining) certainly doesn't help that.
I haven't personally witnessed or heard of the 'stay at home' ridicule, is there anything you could point me to so I could read up on that? Just a site would do. It doesn't match my experience so I'd definitely like to learn more about it! Motherhood is incredible after all, and is necessary for our prolonged survival, but at the same time the planet is pretty overpopulated so there'd have to be a pretty major culture shift to actively decline the population.
Thanks for replying again!
>I figured you guys would be better than b or r9k for not being trolled, I didn't think it was that bad here.
Why are you using Sup Forums as a source at all? Wikipedia makes more sense, and that's prone to vandalism.
>I've had a couple of sincere answers in the thread!
I don't think so. But if that's what you have to tell yourself, be my guest.
>I'm not really trying to do the article 'on pol' I just wanted data that represented both sides of the spectrum, if that makes sense?
Containment board for low quality posts. We are astroturfed daily. You will not receive any legitimate answers. To go as far as claiming pol can represent either side of the spectrum shows how how much integrity you have.
>I'll add a thank you note to you to the bottom of the article if I get good results!
So when people read your articles, and notice your source is Sup Forums, do they think it's a good idea? Your audience must either browse here or hate this place to care enough about a handful of opinions.
>Any places you recommend, from either side?
Preferably school, university, where it isn't completely anonymous and their credibility isn't in question. This way, random strangers won't be pretending to be anyone with you when they answer your questions
Now, this thread's legitimacy is in question. Sorry, OP
1. No
2. No
3. N/A
4. Yes
Other comments: Your survey is, generally speaking, unhelpful. Namely, it asks simple "yes or no" questions about an ideology/movement but fails to offer its own definition of that movement for participants to base their answers on, or conversely, to provide participants with the opportunity to offer their own definition in order to contextualize their answers. This is inherently problematic because a piece of terminology, but particularly the terminology in question, usually means entirely different things to different people. There are a number of steps you could take to rectify this including, but not limited to, rewriting the survey, necking yourself, or choosing a new career.
1. Yes in the middle east those activists are closer to first wave and second wave than the cancer that is the third wave that is terrorizing North America and Europe. The biggest problem here is that in the middle east, Islam has yet to go through the... softening process I guess you could call it that Christianity did during the centuries following the idealogical split from traditional catholicism. Islam is still too strict, especially in places like Saudi Arabia, to allow for much progress to be made on that front. Alternatively in places like the United Arab Emirates, which has taken on more western influences since it's desire to be a global trade leader, has allowed equality of women to be increasingly explored in order to be more enticing to foreign investment.
2. Again, I refuse to support an movement who has taken such a drastic left turn from its foundation. Third wave/modern western feminism has lost the respect and core values that were rightfully earned by the pioneers of the first wave (and to a lesser degree second wave). The respect for due political process and the respectful and benificial debate of the issues. Instead of idealologists like Susan B. Anthony, we have shills like Anita Sarkisian who think everything is offensive and mysoginistic and that everything a woman says is truth, regardless of the facts.
(continues below)
4. There can't be a purge at this point. It's forever going to be tainted by radicalism. A good parallel and example to look at is the old LGB movement. T (and the rest of the alphabet) has forcefully taken over the movement despite being in the absolute minority. The old members and leaders are having their hard fought achievements hijacked by radicals and are finding themselves being alienated withing the movement they created (quite normal for leftist ideas funny enough, the minority holds the majority hostage). The rapid shift to radicalism are forcing many to be idealogically pushed out and even demonized now (gay white men for example, former leaders of the movement). Third wave feminism is going down the same rocky path over the cliff.
5. Agreed. If you can prove you can do the job to the same quality and standard as those already doing it, there is no reason why you shouldn't be given the opportunity to prove so. The modern west has the problem now that people who are not qualified for certain things are being put into positions they can not meaningfully contribute to thanks to afirmative action and diversity quotas. Putting an unqualified individual into a position they biologically shouldn't be is at least unproductive and reduces the quality of the work and at most dangerous or fatal. Human social progress has far escaped our biological abilities and it is causing serious problems.
OP is a faggot
No Bump
>I won't post the link so I don't get spammed out
>docs.google.com
Here you go.
Sup Forums is pretty anti feminist in general, and any sincere answers to that end would be pretty useful as opposition.
I didn't think pol fully represented it, it would just be a sample of some of the things people were against feminism for. If recurring themes came up they'd be included and explored.
I would thank an anonymous submission, rather than thank Sup Forums itself.
I'll definitely be meeting with the newspaper team to see if I can get the form shared through the official media, and already have some appointments with the people who were running and talking at the debate. I'll definitely put more of those in!
Sure, question away. I doubt I'll ever sufficiently convince you of my legitimacy and it doesn't really bother me either. One less response hardly breaks my back.
It's not very clear from the picture but those are extended text boxes; I'll definitely change the wording to better encourage people to elaborate on what they mean and maybe add a question about what they personally define feminism as and what they think feminism does in modern times. Thank you!
I'll update your responses with these additions. Thank you for continuing the discussion!
1) I agree with entirely
2) I think you have a valid point, hopefully my inclusion of a 'what is feminism to you' question should help people like yourself who don't agree with the current feminism but do with earlier iterations.
4) I certainly would hope feminism and the LGBT movements can be reclaimed from an the extreme minority, but I don't expect much either to be honest.
5) I agree with that too!
That's not very helpful, but I can just remake the poll. If what the guy earlier said is true, that Sup Forums is dead, I won't even need to.
I'm curious, amateur Journalist, how would you answer your own questions?
Good luck tracking down proper info, you’ve probably seen already how quickly information that doesn’t support the narrative gets removed from the internet (as what’s happened with info on the Rohingya).
With stay at home mums being denigrated, the evidence you’ll find for that are articles about women being embarrassed to say they were stay at home mothers, there was a definite feeling that if you didn’t embrace a career at the expense of family then you hadn’t been liberated. I have no idea if this has ever been the subject of a research paper.
It might be interesting for you to go into the ‘manosphere’ on the internet. I learnt a lot about where the dialogue between men and women had gone wrong by reading what men complained about amoungst themselves. Don’t read as a feminist, read as a researcher
Best of luck with your article. Though it will probably be axed because of negative, mysoginistic opinions, because that is the kind of world we live in now. Minority holding the majority at social gun point.
1) True Feminism, prior to minorities taking over, was about gender equality. That feminism is a force for good.
2) I'd rather use the term gender egalitarian to distance myself from the third wave shittery, but ultimately yes.
3) Because I believe in equal rights and equality of opportunity between all demographics.
4) We should move on from third wave feminism, but not from equality.
True, it's a shame how bad things have become. That sounds like something I could search for, so I should at least be able to find some statements and possibly some contact info to gather some myself.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'manosphere', but I can definitely try and see what men complain about amongst themselves. This is all for research, I should be ok!
Not the Israeli study, but here's one by the US Army:
dtic.mil
Awesome, thank you very much!
1) ghostbusters
2) ghostbusters
3) gosutobasuta
4) ghostbusters 2
>I won't post the link so I don't get spammed out
But you did, obviously on purpose, someone can't be this stupid.
下げる
It was to avoid low effort trolls.
A very centralized answer. I like how you think, AJ, but that's not to say that I don't disagree with you. True equality in opportunity is generally a good thing, but true equality in nature is something unachievable through social engineering. We as humans are not equal creatures, and the idea that we were created equally is something that sounds good, but is ultimately untrue. From birth, the child that emerges is not just a clean template to which society can mold it, genetics and a little bit of predetermined fate play a role there. You're not wrong for advocating in equal opportunity or equal rights, but I believe that simply moving away from third wave feminism and into an equality based mindset is harder than what you may believe, because third wave feminism is the recognization of a shift in the balance of power and the realization of it as an opportunity. If society were shifted, you would see a similar outcome in men's rights movements, where the movement would eventually become awoken to its true purpose.
But, that's just my 2 cents. Your developments from this study will be interesting. Find a way to post it here when you're done, some might find interest in reading.
>We should move on from third wave feminism, but not from equality.
In what ways, if any, do you believe that equality has not been achieved between the sexes?
I read into the sources of the study, and it cites the Israeli combat women study. You could probably look into that from there
Women can still be legally stoned to death in the middle east!
Sounds good, I'll post a link to a copy of it, rather than one that has all my info on it. Thanks for your time :)
That's great of you, thank you, I'll see if I can chase it down.
What about in western society? In what ways, if any, do you believe that equality has not been achieved between the sexes in western society?
Oh. Yeah, well sure, I'm in support of trying to stop that. But the problem is that most "feminists" don't take up that cause. Instead, they advocate for bringing people from those regions to the West and not making any demands on them to assimilate because "it just their culture."
It'd be great if "feminists" worked towards preventing women from being stoned in the middle east today. Instead, they work towards women being stoned in the West tomorrow.
Also this, because that was mainly what I meant by my question.
Western society is difficult because the 'major' issues have been dealt with, leaving minor inequality for women.
Some inequality in hiring is due to women wanting maternity leave so they're not as 'safe' a candidate. Easy solution would be to have paternity leave too, but that would be twice as expensive. Wage gap is another example but with the amount of conflicting data it's hard to properly decide a figure, but most economists agree there is at least some disparity. Sociologists would say there is a social factor to disparity, but there's a lot of debate about it.
Another couple examples would be the big disadvantage men have in child custody cases, as well as there higher suicide risk and other health issues that receive less funding than female ones.
There's too many to name fully, though.
I don't think the middle east is as big an issue that bringing them over will actively lead to stonings, but the resultant culture change that they will try to enforce won't necessarily be pretty. The Irish assimilated really well as an immigrant population that were discriminated against heavily and if other immigrants took that route they'd do a lot better to fully become a part of society properly.
What a shit survey. People have very different views on what feminism means today. You would need to have half the survey dedicated to finding out what people think feminism actually is.
One of the main things I learned about men was how entrenched the role of provider was and how integral it is to their sense of self worth and identity. I don’t feel this is true to the same extent in women judging by what I read. A lot of men think their main value to a woman is what they earn. When they get pushed aside in the name of affirmative action they feel their most vital bargaining chip is being taken and replaced with nothing. We can tell them it’s ok if they earn less than their wife or become a stay at home husband, but at the same time women constantly go for a higher income man so men know they’re being fed empty propaganda. It was an interesting takeaway and made me see both sides of the argument.
Oh, and if you are wondering why I am on Sup Forums, I came here when it was the only site in the net discussing the cologne assaults. I hate media censorship
Thanks, I didn’t have time to read thru it, I hope it’s not watered down
1. No it's not. Is a way for
socialist/communists/zionists to polarize the society and make women hate themselves.
2. Absolutely not.
3. BS
4. If you're not moving on the world will and you will end up left behind.
5. Feminism has made women much more unhappy and in the long run this movwement will be the reason why men revoke you right to vote and speak freely.
I conceded that earlier in the thread and will amend it before releasing the survey to the general public.
Sounds worth reading, independent from this. I'll take a look, thanks! I found Sup Forums for similar reasons actually, Brexit was heavily propagandised and there was no atmosphere of discussion, especially not in my university. You were either against it or you weren't given a platform.
I am another former lefty that jumped ship as the left has descended into outright mouth-foaming madness over the last 10-15 years, and the effects of this shift became more and more apparent. Feminism's transformation from a perfectly reasonable "respect me" to a deranged "worship me you cismale scum" is a great illustrator of what I'm referring to. My mother, a former feminist activist in the 1970s, is completely sickened and horrified by what the movement has become in the time since she marched under its banner back then.
What separates men from women? You have both male and female hormones. Nurses, Teachers and Stay at home Mothers should have been held in higher regards as well as working men. What makes a man a man and a woman a woman? King of the casle and his Queen.
Feminism is cancer. Women should be enslaved until the time that we can replace them with artificial wombs.
Your mother is a worthless whore
>t. bitter incel mistaking his FEELS for REALS
Socialistation, psychology and biology, I'd say. There's bound to be reasons that tomboys and traps existing that don't stick strictly to the biological ideal form for men/women.
Thanks for your contribution! Care to specify a bit more about what it is that you and your mother have witnessed that makes you averse to feminism?
>I conceded that earlier in the thread and will amend it before releasing the survey to the general public.
My bad. Didn’t read through whole thread. I would also suggest that in addition to the definition questions, you give your own definition at the start of the survey as a sort of disclaimer.
Are traps gay?
feminism then
>I want the right to vote, and I want to be treated less like property!
feminism now
>I want the right to unlimited abortions, and I want the state to pay for any children that I accidentally have, and I want them to pay for my birth control too so I can keep having unlimited sex with unlimited partners, and I want to be able to take all of my husbands shit when I decide to divorce him (including children) And I want combat roles for women (not me of course! other women). I want all men reshape society to worship me. I want men to die.
Yeah feminism can go away now, we as humans have no need for it anymore.
This hilarious clip is basicly is how I feel about feminism. youtu.be
Seriously though. Feminism is an affront to everything that is actually feminine. I view it as a "destroy from within 5th column" type of movement. A feminist woman is an unhappy creature whereas a truly feminine woman has the world at her feet and power beyond words. I'm a happy wife and mother btw.
Brexit highlights it perfectly, the mainstream media keeps a stranglehold on public information and debate to an extent I find criminal.
Forgot the pic :-) This is what "feminine" women desire deep down, whether they admit it or not. It's hardwired into us.
We never had a need for it. Female voting has destroyed civilization and we will be lucky if we can ever recover from it.
Friendly bump for OP
Good idea, thank you!
The ones I've interacted with are. I don't know of any traps that like chicks. As for liking traps, yes. They aren't women and they are pretty open about that fact. Some gay men just want to pretend they aren't, mainly so that if they get caught fucking they can pretend that its a chick to whoever sees.
Hah. Can't really cite it but funny all the same.
Absolutely. There's not really any media in the UK that is truly unbiased and tries to report things as matter-of-factly as possible. I'm trying to use that as my niche on my blog and it's been met with mixed responses, mainly from people at extremes of either end. Right wing tends to take it a bit better though.
Kids are definitely a biological imperative, but defining it loosely with 'feminine women' makes it a bit weaker. Traditional values are present in a wide variety of people, I know of a woman who was very 'punk rock' and non-traditional for the most part but settled down with kids. Still dresses non-traditionally, has her bikes and listens to the music, but she loves her husband and their two daughters.
Thank you!
1. Only for helping those in 3rd world countries who are actually oppressed (child marriage, FGM etc.)
2. No definitely not!
3. N/A
4. I think feminism should move on in the sense that us living in 1st world countries already have equality. The women in 3rd world countries need feminism due to the child marriage and FGM epidemics in the 3rd world.
>This is coming from a female. I never bring up my gender on Sup Forums because it's irrevelamt 99.99% of the time but I feel like in this post it is. Hopefully my reply helps you out!
Thanks for the data!
You're welcome =)
There is a fundamental difference between Irish immigration into the U.S. or UK (I'm not sure which you're talking about), on the one hand, and immigration from Muslim countries in the middle east to the West, on the other. The Irish should not be viewed as a case study for what could reasonably be expected for other immigrant groups, particularly middle eastern muslims. There is a FAR larger cultural and ethnic gap between the Irish and English (or Irish and WASP America) than between middle eastern muslims and the West. The Irish were different religiously because they were not Protestant, but they were still Catholic, i.e., they were still Christian. There is a serious historical tension between Protestants and Catholics, but ultimately the two religions are still based around the same core prophet and same core teachings. The core teachings of either religion (Catholic vs. Protestant) do not fundamentally preclude the possibility of having members of the other religion living within the same state. On the other hand, Islam versus Christianity is based on a completely different prophet, different holy book and different core set of teachings. The values and teachings that are at the core of Islam are fundamentally incompatible with both Christianity and with secularism in the West. Look at surveys of Muslims who live in the West, even second- or third-generation Muslims, and you'll find the majority believing things like homosexuals should be executed and the apostates from the Muslim religion should face the same fate.
Then there is the racial question. Here in the US at least, there was obvious tension between 1st gen Irish and the Americans already here, but that tension naturally subsides in the second generation. British/Germanic WASPs and Irish people are genetically different, but practically speaking, there are not glaring physical differences unless someone is specifically looking for them.
Absolutely! I should have specified the pic just means "husband, children,& home filled with love" I would classify your friend as definitely a "Feminine" woman. It doesn't really have anything to do with clothing. Each woman dresses to be pleasing to her own husband and that comes in all varieties. Punky, business professional, outdoorsey, sexy, etc.
>two females interact on a mongolian throat chanting forum, circa 2018
There are plenty of reasons to pick from, but the one that both her and I keep coming back to is the way modern feminists have made viciously denigrating women who choose motherhood over career into one of their favorite pastimes. She marched for agency, the right to choose career OR motherhood (or some combination thereof); modern feminists seem to have decided that there is something fundamentally WRONG with women who have chosen the latter over the former, and have made it their mission to shame those women for their choice.
Kind of ironic, since a sound argument can be presented that motherhood is the single most important occupation a person can choose.
1. No
2. No
3. N/A
4. Yes. We need to recognise that it was a mistake. Giving women the right to vote incentivises politicians to drive a wedge between the genders in exchange for votes, this is an important factor in why gender relations are at an all time low. Allowing women to pursue careers means that the many of the most intelligent women in society are no longer having children. This will have disastrous effects in the future as the average IQ of the population drops. Women are the most unhappy that they've been in recent history. Feminism is primarily to blame.
Other comments: The HAES movement (which seems to be strongly related to certain brands of feminism) is one of the most disgusting things that I've ever seen. Fat people should be locked in cages and given only water and vitamins until they are thin enough to squeeze through the bars and leave.
Oh for sure there's a difference, but I think if they were actually willing, they could assimlate within a few generations. Oriental cultures have done it too, although with a bit more difficulty. It was just an example. What it requires, fundamentally, is the will to do so, and the societal pressure to encourage it. As is, there's neither.
Ah, in that case, I can see your point a bit better. Feminine to me has always kinda meant 'girly', but your definition would stretch. There are definitely non 'feminine' women out there too, though.
Someone earlier said this too. Definitely going to explore a little myself and see if I can find some non-user testimonies to add some credence when I add it. Thanks!
Well, I've gotta go for a couple hours and the thread will probably die in that time. Feel free to use the form, I've not had many troll replies so I'll just post the link again to be sure.
Peace out, girl scouts, was nice chatting with you. If the threads still up I'll share some of my data from other places.
docs.google.com
(continued)
By the second generation, when people no longer have an Irish accent, it was impossible to develop an "us vs. them" mentality when walking around on the street because, practically speaking, everyone just looked white. It wasn't very practical to maintain Irish vs. WASP allegiances in the US when it was increasingly difficult to actually tell who was of Irish ancestry and who was of English/German ancestry. The situation is obviously very different in the case of middle easterners vs Westerners, where the physical differences are so glaring that they simply cannot be ignored or overlooked. As both Lincoln and Jefferson predicted, America still has not (and likely never will) avoid problematic relations between blacks and whites, and the physical differences that are glaringly apparent between the groups are partly to blame.
You think I'm being hyperbolic when I discuss the possibility of stoning in the middle east. Perhaps, but you're downplaying the situation. Western nations are democracies. Majority rule. You feel very secure about this immigration now, but bear in mind your view is heavily influenced by the fact that these groups lack serious power to radically change your nation by virtue of white Britians being the majority population. But what will happen when middle eastern muslims are the majority population. If at some point in the future, 50% of the population is in favor of something (e.g., stoning women who dress scandalously), then that something will be made into reality. Sure, maybe there's extra protections against something so barbaric, but those can ultimately be overcome. We have the constitution in the US, but that can ultimately be overruled by an amendment, which simply requires a larger majority than 50%.
How certain are you that middle eastern muslims will not, when given the opportunity, make fundamental changes to the West?
I don't think the thread will be alive when you come back. Don't hesitate to make a new one.
>BREAKING: Basement-Dwelling Permavirgin Has Opinion; No One Cares
No need to get hostile just because you're going to die without getting laid, buddy.
>Equal rights
Good, except for voting rights.
>Equality
Can't believe people still fall for this shit.
Re motherhood and feminism, I found this. It’s probably useful as a springboard if nothing else billmuehlenberg.com
See also , where I continued.
Final thoughts. As I've already mentioned, there's a wide range of empirical data showing that Muslims (even 2nd/3rd generation) in the West have held on to beliefs that are fundamentally incompatible with Western values. How confident are you that this trend will somehow change in the future when Muslims constitute an even bigger portion of the population, and thus new Muslim immigrants face even less pressure to integrate into Western values. If you acknowledge that large swaths of Muslims tend to be retaining these values, and you acknowledge that they will do so at an increasing rate as they become a larger portion of the population, then you should acknowledge that ultimately the views in question will become the position held by the majority in your country. Therefore, people supporting these positions will be voted into power.
Take the horrible beliefs in question and call them "Incompatible Beliefs." If you acknowledge
>(1) the percentage of Muslims that retain the Incompatible Beliefs when moving to the West; and
>(2) the rate of immigration into the West (which projects that Muslims will become the majority in many Western nations within the next century, including the UK)
Then you must--as a matter of necessity--acknowledge that at some point within the next century, the majority of people living in the UK or other Western nations will hold Incompatible Beliefs. If you further acknowledge that:
>(3) In Western democracies, the majority hold sway and tend to elect official who support their ideals and seek to implement them
Then you must acknowledge the following:
>Conclusion: within the next century, Western nations will be governed by people who hold Incompatible Beliefs and seek to implement them in the West
Oh yes! We must define it differently. Somewhere there is a biker chick that would kick someone's ass in a bar over her husband, there's a factory worker lady that's standing there making water heaters thinking about what to cook for supper. These women are feminine in my eyes. The way I would describe it is "a state of mind." That state of mind is where a woman will flourish and achieve great things whether in the home or a career. It's like two ppl dreaming the same dream and working together towards achieving that goal together. Today's Rabid feminism is a selfish state and selfishness breeds discontent.
Feminism is a cancer helping to slowly destroy western culture. If you are truly interested in understanding it's subversive nature I would suggest you start by watching this youtube.com
After you understand the basic concept as outlined in the video I linked come back and hang out on Sup Forums for a month for a fullon redpilling.
1. No
2. Hell no
3. N/A
4. Hell yes
Feminism, since the suffragettes, has been about getting the rights but avoiding the responsibilities. They wanted the vote, but not the draft. Hell, they still don't want that, look at the response to draft our daughters. They want equal pay, but they want it for getting a gender studies degree, and complain when engineers make more. They want to be included in everything, but then demand the groups or activities be changed to suit them, despite paying lip service to equality and initially demanding they get treated like anyone else. In short, their actions never seem to align with their professed ideals, so why would I ever bother with such blatant hypocrites?
1. No. What has feminism really done? Even the first wave. Women suffrage lead to universal suffrage, and that fucks up any democracy.
2. No
3. No one needs cancer.
4. We should, the fastest the better for women. They're the most damaged by it.
5. Research on feminist black shirts. Women are 99% alike: fucking sheep or sheep in wolfs clothing.
This has to became satirical shitpost.
HAS
TO
BE
> t. college dumb american
Those are all very loaded questions, OP. The answers to which should be blatantly evident.
Bump, good thread OP.
> We need feminism because of islam and shit hole countries where women doesn't have rights (but neither do men).
Do you know the name of this report?
Alas no. Another user posted a report which used some of the IDF findings so it could be in there. It was seemed to be be quite prominent and widely discussed before (((they))) cleaned up the internet. Wikipedia had a summary when I first researched women in the army back when Wikipedia was real
Archived this thread, to compare to others. If you can, put the link of this thread onto your blogpost. Don't worry if it gets archived, that is the point. I'll be able to find your blog that way.
Do you know when this was? Perhaps it is still on their edits archive or the Wayback Machine.
1) feminism is great for the extinction of humans and destruction of society. since singularity is almost here, feminism must be accelerated
2) yes!
3) as a social darwinist eugenicist and supporter of population collapse, i am implicitly a feminist. one can not be without the other.
4) yes, only if we adopt more direct and effective methods of population reduction, but we should keep feminism as a complementary method!
full disclosure: I follow the Rockefeller school of population control and am a member of several Soros NGOs and think tanks that implement public policy.
1. No, it's a force of division, women are too retarded to see that
2. No, your a faggot
3. I don't and your father is a faggot too
4. It only exist for a small percentage of women, most women are actually normal (Outside of cities). I think feminist should be declared mentally unstable and put in the funny farm
5. No don't add anymore questions, the ones you have are retarded enough, any more and you lvl of self-embarrassment will be too much to contain
Bait haha
Bet this is some edgy dude in college whos facebook friend invited him to take this survey, so he decided to post on 4 chan 4 luls. Can you at least promise to post her response or if you have same class videotape her presentation.
OP you should include the Jaffe memo in your report
We don’t need feminism, we need proper families. Sage
en.wikipedia.org
1st wave and 2nd wave were worthy and fine or mostly fine.
Then feminists won. The movement died.
But it kept moving. 3rd and 4th wave feminism is zombie feeding off virtue signalling institutions that fund Women's Studies departments.
Their job is to find things to complain about and entertain wannabe rebels who thought the 60s were cool. ( Ironically the real counterculture is right nowadays but sheep are easily manipulated into service of the system )
I don't know much about feminism besides what I see out there, but I will add my opnions to this.
1. Was, feminism used to be about fighting for equal rights, nowdays it just seems like feminists want to be superior to men or want them gone for some reason.
2. No.
4. I don't know, on one hand 3rd wave feminism is cancer, on the other the real feminism actually fighted for equal rights for all, even if they're small, there are some differences between men and women in our rights, a lot created by 3rd wave feminism I add, if anything, the only place which really needs feminism is the Middle East.
Other. There seems to be feminists who try to preserve the 1/2 wave feminism, I don't know if they're a minority but the 3rd wave feminists and media try to shut them down, often by shaming them and saying they're not real feminists, it would be valuable to find them and hear their opnions, also the media seems pro-3rd wave feminism, I think it's mostly with the intent of dividing the population.
Good luck with your research.
>Respectful
>Handing out feathers to men and calling them cowards for not joining the war or being back home from the war.
>Pick one.
The main issue with first wave feminism, which has remained to this day, is that it argues that women should have the same rights and privileges as men without the same responsibilities.
Each subsequent 'wave' has only compounded this base issue.