It’s just in your nature to want to be ravages and taken against your will. The sooner you accept it the sooner you can enjoy the pleasure of being a rape doll for men.
Every one I’ve ever fucked at least ;)
It’s okay to admit it.
So much better than those “I need feminism because” signs.
Choosing to follow does not make you lesser but ignoring your heart to fit in certainly does.
These days little girls grow up learning that they can do anything, achieve anything, that they can be just as good as the boys at whatever they want to do. They are taught that they should take charge as future leaders and that any reluctance they may feel is because of society’s problems. That’s right… the patriarchy.
This is all well and good for many of them but there are always a few girls who silently think to themselves that it doesn’t sound right, that it feels more natural to let the boys make the decisions and to just follow their lead. The problem is that they are then taught to believe that sort of thinking is bad, it’s confusing to be told that something you see as natural is bad even though in your heart you know it’s right.
Are you sure you want boys to be held as accountable as girls? When will you feminists realize that not everything is a grand scheme to oppress women? When will you realize that men actually are worse off than are women in many channels of society? “Boys will be accountable,” oooh how radical! -_- Men on average are held more accountable for their actions than are women, in the courtroom and out. Hey feminists, your femaleprivilege is showing.
Have you considered that those scientists might be bias and pushing an agenda. Gender is a biological absolute.
Gender is highly contextualized by time and place. Like, if you want to talk about scientists being biased and pushing an agenda, look at modern western science for pushing a flawed binary narrative.
Non-binary genders are not a modern invention. The idea of third genders/non-binary genders is as old as human civilization, because gender is socially constructed and subjective, and people’s ideas about gender have changed over time and between cultures.
In Mesopotamian mythology, among the earliest written records of humanity, there are references to types of people who are not men and not women. In a Sumerian creation myth found on a stone tablet from the second millennium BC, the goddess Ninmah fashions a being “with no male organ and no female organ”, for whom Enki finds a position in society: “to stand before the king”.
In Babylonia, Sumer and Assyria, certain types of individuals who performed religious duties in the service of Inanna/Ishtar have been described as a third gender.
Inscribed pottery shards from the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (2000–1800 BCE), found near ancient Thebes (now Luxor, Egypt), list three human genders: tai (male), sḫt (“sekhet”) and hmt (female).
The Vedas (c. 1500 BC–500 BC) describe individuals as belonging to one of three categories, according to one’s nature or prakrti. These are also spelled out in the Kama Sutra (c. 4th century AD) and elsewhere as pums-prakrti (male-nature), stri-prakrti (female-nature), and tritiya-prakrti (third-nature).
Many have interpreted the “eunuchs” of the Ancient Eastern Mediterranean world as a third gender that inhabited a liminal space between women and men, understood in their societies as somehow neither or both. In the Historia Augusta, the eunuch body is described as a tertium genus hominum (a third human gender),
The ancient Maya civilization may have recognised a third gender, according to historian Matthew Looper. Looper notes the androgynous Maize Deity and masculine Moon goddess of Maya mythology, and iconography and inscriptions where rulers embody or impersonate these deities. He suggests that the third gender could also include two-spirit individuals with special roles such as healers or diviners
Anthropologist Rosemary Joyce agrees, writing that “gender was a fluid potential, not a fixed category, before the Spaniards came to Mesoamerica. Childhood training and ritual shaped, but did not set, adult gender, which could encompass third genders and alternative sexualities as well as “male” and “female.” At the height of the Classic period, Maya rulers presented themselves as embodying the entire range of gender possibilities, from male through female, by wearing blended costumes and playing male and female roles in state ceremonies.“
Andean Studies scholar Michael Horswell writes that third-gendered ritual attendants to chuqui chinchay, a jaguar deity in Incan mythology, were “vital actors in Andean ceremonies” prior to Spanish colonisation.
Two-spirit individuals are viewed in some Native American cultures as having two identities occupying one body. Their dress is usually a mixture of traditionally male and traditionally female articles, or they may dress as a man one day, and a woman on another.
In Pakistan, the hijras are officially recognized as third gender by the government,
Well that’s stupid. All this proves is that special snowflakes are older then we thought.
Wait, did someone argue myth when discussing science? Really? There isn’t a third gender, there are genetic mutations and abnormalities. There are genetic flukes that are usually sterile because they are mess ups and their genetics were never meant to continue.
“Yeah but what about this culture over here that still lives in favellas and praises an eight armed goddess, they have 7 genders, so obviously it’s totally normal”
Let’s just abandon everything that’s made western society successful because I need to feel special about being an effiminate male because my dad never told me to grow the fuck up.
lmao, buddy, everything that made western society “”successful”” is violent imperialism and colonialism. For someone who has a header going on about truth, you sure do believe a lot of lies, don’t you? Like, talking about the Native American tribes alone before Europeans started fucking things up… Racist, transphobic, and ignorant ain’t a good look for you.
P.S. - F&F is a woman, buddy. Dial back the whining about men who don’t fit your idea of ~masculinity~, because it’s not relevant to the conversation and no one cares that you’re threatened by men who aren’t traditionally masculine.
See your mistake is thinking I give a fuck or think any of that was wrong.
The earth is a finite resource with multiple competing interests.
Conflict is natural, and it means there will be winners and losers. People can whine all they want, but it’s just annoying, it doesn’t mean anything.
Also, western society is successful, compared to south America, most of Asia, most of Africa, and basically all of the middle east - all of whom tried their hand at imperialism and werent as good at it as we were. So, yeah, eat me.
You: look at all these dumb primative people making up genders who live in huts Me: Actually, it’s been proven that indigenous people like Native American tribes were quite advanced and intelligent- You:
Easier to stay ignorant and whiny than to admit that people know more about “truth” then you do, eh? You lost the second you went “I don’t care” in a conversation about truth, facts, and history.
I think we’re done here, kid. You’re not interested in anyone criticizing you or discussing things. Don’t both replying because it’s gonna get ignored, since you obviously have nothing of actual use to say.
You, someone who doesn’t know the difference between sex and gender: There are only two genders! We need two genders to be able to reproduce! WAKE UP SHEEPLE
Me: It doesn’t matter how many sexes or genders there are, you’re in no danger of reproducing with any of them
How about you dress appropriately to school and then you won’t have to worry about being sent home? You can’t wear whatever skimpy outfit you want and then claim sexism when you get punished for it. Boys can’t show too much skin either or sag with their underwear showing. Not everything is a conspiracy against women. Hardly anything at all is. It’s more likely and quite evident that you just have a very sensitive victim complex. Feminism is cancer.
the anniversary of the montreal massacre is coming up on december 6th.
in 1989 on december 6th a 25 year old male entered the École Polytechnique de Montréal, an engineering school, with the intent to “fight feminism”. he made his way into a classroom and separated the male and female students, called the 9 women “a bunch of feminists” and shot the women, killing 6 of them. he advanced through the hallways, went into the cafeteria, another classroom, his only targets were women. at the end of it he killed 14 women, injured 10 other women, and injured 4 men all in under twenty minutes before turning the gun on himself. in his suicide note, this man claimed political motives and also blamed feminists for ruining his life which included a list of 19 women that he labeled as feminists and wanted kill.
december 6th in canada is known as National Day of Rememberance and Action on Violence Against Women where flags are flown at half-mast, a moment of silence is encouraged to be observed, and a white ribbon to be worn.
the victims names:
Geneviève Bergeron (born 1968), civil engineering student
Hélène Colgan (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Nathalie Croteau (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Barbara Daigneault (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Anne-Marie Edward (born 1968), chemical engineering student
Maud Haviernick (born 1960), materials engineering student
Maryse Laganière (born 1964), budget clerk in the École Polytechnique’s finance department
Maryse Leclair (born 1966), materials engineering student
Anne-Marie Lemay (born 1967), mechanical engineering student
Sonia Pelletier (born 1961), mechanical engineering student
Michèle Richard (born 1968), materials engineering student
Annie St-Arneault (born 1966), mechanical engineering student
Annie Turcotte (born 1969), materials engineering student
Barbara Klucznik-Widajewicz (born 1958), nursing student
Fuck feminism. I’m so tired of having it shoved down my throat by people who pick apart every word of what I say. Just because I used the word slut doesn’t mean I’m trying to offend you. It’s not my fault if you’re offended that I used the word slut. You don’t even know me. You can’t change how I think.
“I need feminism because… I shouldn’t have to hide my boobs!”
Alright, I’m going to ignore any sort of sexualization of boobs or whether they are or aren’t sexual organs arguments. I’m going to look at the realistic implications of legalising female toplessness:
- Forcefully groping someones breasts will no longer fall under the category of sexual assault. It will simply be physical assault, which will receive a significantly smaller punishment than the latter.
- If someone familiar to you gives you a hug, and as their arms wrap around you they end up grabbing the sides of your naked breasts instead of your shoulders, don’t expect to have any solid ground to report them. No, touching your boobs would be as un-offensive as touching your shoulders. I hope you are comfortable with a small amount friendly fondling.
- Now that your boobs are on display, you need to accept the fact that people will comment on them. In the same way that people comment on your dress style, your hair, your arms, your legs, your piercings, your tan, your face, your feet, or anything else that you choose to uncover and put on display, they will also begin to comment on your breasts. Here are some questions you should expect to receive when you go topless:
“You should probably even out your bra tan”
“you boobs look more veiny than mine”
“Why are your nipples so dark?”
“What size are you?”
“Are you worried about your boobs going saggy without a bra?”
“Your boobs are tiny/massive!”
“Your nipples are tiny/massive!”
“I find it so fascinating watching your boobs bounce up and down”
“You should probably pluck those hairs around your areola”
“You have a bit of acne there (points), maybe you should try X to clear it up”
“They look a bit… droopy”
- Topless scenes will be acceptable for children’s movies and television. If being topless is as natural and as un-offensive as wearing a shirt, I don’t see why anyone would think this is unreasonable. We can have great time watching cartoons of women with breasts that defy physics. Our young girls, who won’t even have breasts at this stage, are going to have a great time hitting puberty.
- Now that we have legalized baring our breasts publicly, we cannot discriminate and put an age limit on this issue. This included teenies. Yes, those preteen girls with their little buds will be flouncing them around for any pedophile to fantasise over. Yes, those same pedophiles could even take photos of her, not directly of course, but she will be in the photo none the less. They can then take those photos home and wank all over it. The best part about it, feminists have made it legal for this to happen because of their bare-breast campaign.
- You can’t even keep photography of female toplessness illegal, because it is currently legal to have men topless in photographs. If you tried illegalize female toplessness yet keep male toplessness legal, than that would be discrimination and not equality. As we all know, feminism is about equality, right?
“I need feminism because… I want to see more women in power.”
As a female myself, I wholeheartedly disagree. I do not want to see women come to power if their only redeeming quality is being female. I want to see passionate, dedicated, honest and humble human beings come to power because of their own individual merit based on their personality, morals, ethics and philosophy rather than the gender they identify as.
I understand that there isn’t a huge representation of women within the political realm, but I personally don’t see that as an inherently good or bad thing. I would rather see one highly acclaimed female in a position of power go down in history as a highly respected and renowned leader, than to see one hundred standard females in positions of power simply because we thought it was a woman’s turn. We desperately need to focus on quality, not quantity.
In regards to the apparent lack of high profile political female role models that is supposedly hurting our daughters… I think gendered role models are irrelevant. Why do we insist that little girls need to look up to bigger girls? Is it because the only thing they have in common is their gender? Why do we insist that girls and boys need to look up to their respective adult equivalances? That just further perpetuates gender stereotypes and divisions and encourages biased preferences. Can’t young girls look up to men like Nelson Mandela and Martin Luther, and aren’t boys allowed to have Rosa Parks and Margaret Thatcher as role models? Yes, these people may have had their flaws, but they did some incredible good in the world and I think it is sad that we are still looking at their genders and not their merits.
We don’t need feminism simply because there is an imbalanced ratio of men:women in politics. We already know that it is possible for women to achieve high political positions in America (Thanks Hilary) but we need to look past peoples genders and support the individuals who truly deserve it.
“I support feminism because it is still not OK for a woman to go into a mens locker room”
As blatantly ridiculous as this statement is, it is still incredibly hard to argue against without being somewhat hypocritical.
On one hand I don’t believe that all men are rapists or perverts. On the other hand, I still don’t want men in the same room as me dressing or showering. You could argue that if I truly believed the first statement, than there would be no logical explanation as to why I would claim the other.
But really, I’m more comfortable getting dressed around girls because we generally have the same anatomy. Girls have breasts. They may come in different shapes and sizes but they are all generally the same thing. We all have the same problems that come with breasts, we have the same familiarity when it comes to breasts. I’m only comfortable getting dressed around girls because we are all familiar with the anatomy we have.
For the exact same reasons I have to admit that I would feel uncomfortable being in a locker room while a transgender female (who had not undergone sex reassignment surgery) was changing. I wouldn’t refuse to be in the same locker room, as I would want to accept her and who she is regardless of her body. At the same time, I simply cannot ignore the fact that I am uncomfortable with penises. I am not used to penises because I have no experience with owning a penis or using one or what it feels like to have one. I am uncomfortable because I am unfamiliar.
I guess it could be the same for why many men are made uncomfortable by the idea of periods. For girls, it is a natural monthly part of life that we deal with and as a result we are quite comfortable with talking about it, hearing about it and empathising with other females about it. If it is such a natural and normal part of your everyday woman, then why would men be so uncomfortable? Ding ding. They are uncomfortable because they are unfamiliar.
I don’t care if you are a woman who is unfazed by being in a locker room with naked/showering changing men, and I don’t care if you are a man who is unfazed by being in a locker room with naked changing/showering women. You might be fine with seeing body parts, but that doesn’t give you the right to to be present while other people are naked and vulnerable. It doesn’t give you the right to make them uncomfortable. I have the right to feel violated if someone of the opposite gender walked in on me with my most intimate parts on display, parts that they don’t have and they aren’t familiar with.
Shout out to the women who can be strong and independent without needing to bring down men (or other women). If you have to bring down someone else in order for you to succeed, then you’re not really succeeding.
