Why can't we just be Egalitarian?

[THE Bigzoman]

Why not either?

Just be you.

[Deleted]

Don't get me wrong, Im all for equality and think that should be the governments policy with all things.. however there is no WE.

People are individuals and can believe in what they want, even if its stupid.

[Deleted]

Egalitarianism is the correct way to treat the human species; we are all pretty much the same, regardless of race, gender etc

Feminism is a hate movement based on conspiracy theories like patriarchy, rape culture, internalised misogyny (this is one of the weird ones) etc -- all designed to change the narrative of human history, to create hatred against men and masculine values, and create a cult of victimhood and natural justice around women

Feminism is about saying: men have done awful things throughout history to women, so it's ok now to discriminate against them

Obviously, revenge is not the way to move forward

[Tempguy]

The Republican Party is an organization. It's just a name of a group of people and continues to be the Republican Party so long as nobody changes the name. Perhaps you mean fiscal and/or social conservatism, which would be closer to a proper analogy, instead of the dumb thing you just did, which is the dumb thing I said people do earlier. Feminism is not an organization. If you craft analogies that depend on it being treated as such, we're all going to have a bad time.

See everyone.

They will go through so much effort to try and invalidate someones factual claim that some people who call themselves Feminists, and are considered Feminists by many others, are indeed hurting the movement.

When all they have to do is agree that "Yes, X person you are speaking of is indeed nuts. I do not think they embody the ideals of Feminism."

And I like how you ignore that the other person brought up Political parties, but you only focus on my inclusion because it goes against your narrative. That is the stuff I have been talking about. The hypocrisy. X is good and well until you use X against me then suddenly it is "stupid".

Give me a break. Whether we are talking parties, religion, or any other organization it is the same. Feminism is not higher than all the others and immune to morons coming in and highjacking the movement. And you lot are just allowing it. Keep it up though. I am rather enjoying the "Anti-Feminism" sentiment that is brewing. I don't identify as anti-feminists, but I would be lying if I said I did not enjoy the points many of them make. It's getting to the point now that low level feminists have to address it. Won't be long until the entire movement is forced to deal with the mindset and wonder how they let their name get tainted so badly.

Remember this so you can tell them. Feminism became a dirty word because you let radicals hijack your movement and make it into a hate group. And when people told you that you should root them out and make it clear they are not a part of your mindset, you instead choose to go defensive and stick your head in the ground.

[May90]

That isn't accurate at all.

This is basically the chicken or the egg example. So you are saying that the Republican party is not in fact a little racist right now since they were established to be something good, but the members are acting against that belief?

See, that is a more applicable example, and I find it weird you mention Dem but ignore Republicans. Anyways, A recipe is written down, and the directions are clear. You cant toss a chicken leg in a cake mix and expect a decent cake. Beliefs and movements are different. It's a living breathing thing. You can say you are on the up and up all day, but when individuals start gassing Jews, you can't claim that its on them and Naziism is all good.

Just police your movement. Stop trying to defend things like Feminism is above the stuff that plagues all movements. Deal with the crazies, and people will stop claiming to be Egalitarian/Humanist/Equalist/etc in order to separate themselves from those types.

Or you could not and watch Feminism continue on a downward spiral until even the mainstream media gets fed up.

For the 1000th time, there is nothing in Feminism as an ideology that prescribes people to act the way people you are criticizing are acting. You can't blame an ideology for acts that have nothing to do with this ideology. The recipe is a good example: a recipe can be excellent, and a masterful cook can make an incredible dish out of it - but give it to a horrible cook, and they will mess everything up; apparently, it doesn't diminish the value of recipe, it just means that the cook was crappy.

All people are different; regardless of their beliefs, people can be weak, cowardish, hypocritical, aggressive, you name it. If you pick a group that is aggressive and hypocritical, ignore other groups and say, "This group demonstrates how bad the belief/ideology is" - this is straw manning, nothing more.

I'm not sure what makes you believe I am a feminist, lol. I do not participate in any political movements and such; I am just a guy who lives his life, likes his profession and in generally is quite happy. I have no personal stake here, I am just pointing out logical flaws in your reasoning. Flaws that are very common in anything related to politics, sadly.

---

If you want to criticize an ideology, criticize it for what it is about. If you want to criticize a person or a group of people, criticize them for something inherent to them. You don't get to pick a group of people promoting a certain ideology and say, "This group demonstrates the flaws of the ideology". Similarly, you could just say, "Let's pick 1000 murderers. All of those murderers breath. Apparently they demonstrate the flaws of breathing".

[Zyster]

That isn't accurate at all.

This is basically the chicken or the egg example. So you are saying that the Republican party is not in fact a little racist right now since they were established to be something good, but the members are acting against that belief?

See, that is a more applicable example, and I find it weird you mention Dem but ignore Republicans. Anyways, A recipe is written down, and the directions are clear. You cant toss a chicken leg in a cake mix and expect a decent cake. Beliefs and movements are different. It's a living breathing thing. You can say you are on the up and up all day, but when individuals start gassing Jews, you can't claim that its on them and Naziism is all good.

Just police your movement. Stop trying to defend things like Feminism is above the stuff that plagues all movements. Deal with the crazies, and people will stop claiming to be Egalitarian/Humanist/Equalist/etc in order to separate themselves from those types.

Or you could not and watch Feminism continue on a downward spiral until even the mainstream media gets fed up.

- - - Updated - - -



I'm Black.

I am Egalitarian because I feel that uplifting one group should not come at the expense of another.

Plus the NAACP is pretty fucking racist and people let it slide for some reason. Just a nitpick.

The Republican party is not racist, and a major part of the reason things like slavery doesn't exist anymore (though with how much free stuff Bernie wants to hand out, I wouldn't be surprised if he brought it back in some form). You should know that though. There are people in the republican party that may be racist, but that does not represent the whole. The democratic party has had a longer history related to racism than the Republican party ever has, maybe even ever will.

Also, I'm Republican and not racist. You are telling me though that I am?

[Spectral]

Precisely. And that's so wrong. Women and men are supposed to be equal, but I noticed that feminism very rarely fights inequality issues on their side.
For instance, how many Feminist organization fight to make compulsory conscription to involve Women too? Currently young men in many countries are forced to have many months in the military, whether they want to or not.

I really can't fathom why someone should be obligated to fight for everyone and everything. Fighting for your own group or some other group that you care about is a perfectly fine approach to life.

On the conscription issue, feminists actually have had a bizarre obsession with sending women to war.

[Tempguy]

Similarly, you could just say, "Let's pick 1000 murderers. All of those murderers breath. Apparently they demonstrate the flaws of breathing".

If all the murderers said they were a part of the "I am totally not a murderer, I just like the color of blood" club, I think it would be fair.

[May90]

If all the murderers said they were a part of the "I am totally not a murderer, I just like the color of blood" club, I think it would be fair.

So, if they did that, you would agree that they demonstrate the flaws of breathing?

[Tempguy]

The Republican party is not racist, and a major part of the reason things like slavery doesn't exist anymore (though with how much free stuff Bernie wants to hand out, I wouldn't be surprised if he brought it back in some form). You should know that though. There are people in the republican party that may be racist, but that does not represent the whole. The democratic party has had a longer history related to racism than the Republican party ever has, maybe even ever will.

Also, I'm Republican and not racist. You are telling me though that I am?

To be fair, I honestly don'tr care. I said that cause on this site it is commonly believed that Republican = Racist.

/shrug.

Gonna have to talk to someone else about that. I hate both parties to be honest.

[Zyster]

To be fair, I honestly don'tr care. I said that cause on this site it is commonly believed that Republican = Racist.

/shrug.

Gonna have to talk to someone else about that. I hate both parties to be honest.

Heh that is understandable. Even though I am labeled Republican I actually hate it. I think there is great things both sides have to offer.

[Tempguy]

So, if they did that, you would agree that they demonstrate the flaws of breathing?

Why are you trying to make a biological necessity that all humans must do into a shared ideology?

Yes. If they were all a part of the "I am totes not a murderer..." club I would say that this club breeds murderers and whatever ideology they are spewing needs to be looked into.


The breathing thing is a natural thing that all creatures do and not an ideology. You may as well be talking about some Soccer game as it would be just as relevant.

That's a lot of words you're trying to fit in my mouth.

There is a massive difference between how to consider a formal organization and a social movement. They are fundamentally different types of things and it is dishonest to treat them otherwise.

I didn't even read May90's post because I don't care. I don't read every post in a thread. I just happened to see yours and spotted a shitawful analogy in it, which I correctly pointed out for being shitawful.

Eh, I think it was great. When all it had to be was "better" than the original, which it was. SO either way , mission accomplished.

I bet you are not gonna read the current example in this very post either... Mine still beats it.

[May90]

Why are you trying to make a biological necessity that all humans must do into a shared ideology?

Yes. If they were all a part of the "I am test not a murderer..." club I would say that this club breeds murderers and whatever ideology they are spewing needs to be looked into.


The breathing thing is a natural thing that all creatures do and not an ideology. You may as well be talking about some Soccer game as it would be just as relevant.

Don't like breathing? Okay. I like democracy. If I go tomorrow on the streets, scream, "For democracy!", and start breaking cars with a medieval axe, until I get caught by the police - will it indicate one of the flaws of democracy, specifically that it leads people to breaking cars with medieval axes?

[Tempguy]

Don't like breathing? Okay. I like democracy. If I go tomorrow on the streets, scream, "For democracy!", and start breaking cars with a medieval axe, until I get caught by the police - will it indicate one of the flaws of democracy, specifically that it leads people to breaking cars with medieval axes?

If others also do it in the name of Democracy, yes.

I am ignoring the fact that your example is manufactured to be as absurd and unrelated as possible

But yes. If people had written books about how Democracy demands that you go medieval on property. And several big name politicians also subscribed to that. And it was not unheard of to see a group of (Let's call them Sons of Liberty) acting in the way rad fems act and organize demonstrations on the "proper" form of democracy...

As well as the fact that the general population do not practice that democracy since you cannot claim that the entire population of the country/western world practice feminism and to do so would be a blatant lie,

Then yes I would say that Democracy has a problem since it is breeding some crazies and maybe the "Sons of Liberty" movement needs to police its own if it doesn't want to be seen as some kind of terrorist group.

[Hugnomo]

That isn't accurate at all.

This is basically the chicken or the egg example. So you are saying that the Republican party is not in fact a little racist right now since they were established to be something good, but the members are acting against that belief?

See, that is a more applicable example, and I find it weird you mention Dem but ignore Republicans. Anyways, A recipe is written down, and the directions are clear. You cant toss a chicken leg in a cake mix and expect a decent cake. Beliefs and movements are different. It's a living breathing thing. You can say you are on the up and up all day, but when individuals start gassing Jews, you can't claim that its on them and Naziism is all good.

Just police your movement. Stop trying to defend things like Feminism is above the stuff that plagues all movements. Deal with the crazies, and people will stop claiming to be Egalitarian/Humanist/Equalist/etc in order to separate themselves from those types.

Or you could not and watch Feminism continue on a downward spiral until even the mainstream media gets fed up.

- - - Updated - - -



I'm Black.

I am Egalitarian because I feel that uplifting one group should not come at the expense of another.

Plus the NAACP is pretty fucking racist and people let it slide for some reason. Just a nitpick.

How does it come at the expense of other groups?
I find it difficult to understand that, being black, you wouldn't understand the issues of invisibility in regards to minorities. Don't you agree that covering it under the wide mantle of egalitarianism dillutes the discrimination that black people are specifically and institutionally targeted for?
I am gay, when I advocate for my rights heterossexuals don't expect me to fight in their name, so why does that happen to other groups? I think it's very odd.
I am a feminist because i believe in gender equality and i know that females are still the oppressed ones in that scale. I refuse to discredit the specificity of female oppression, it is denying the fact the females are institutionally discriminated against.
A white person may be the target of racist remarks, and I will fight against it, but a white person will never know the type of systematic racism that people of color have gone/go through, and to me, that is a bigger problem, for it is deeply rooted in our culture and ideologies, and is perpetrated at a societal level.

Basically, I have issue with the visibility that it takes away from minorities. I think it downplays targeted discrimination against oppressed minorities, while implying that it is in any way ballanced out, like : "i'm for the rights of people of color" ... " oh not me, i'm egalitarian" - as if it is more just to include white people, and really, it is not. Systemic racism is not a problem that affects all humans, it's a problem that affects people of color. And the same argument can be made for the rest of the oppressed minorities.

[Tempguy]

How does it come at the expense of other groups?
I find it difficult to understand that, being black, you wouldn't understand the issues of invisibility in regards to minorities. Don't you agree that covering it under the wide mantle of egalitarianism dillutes the discrimination that black people are specifically and institutionally targeted for?
I am gay, when I advocate for my rights heterossexuals don't expect me to fight in their name, so why does that happen to other groups? I think it's very odd.
I am a feminist because i believe in gender equality and i know that females are still the oppressed ones in that scale. I refuse to discredit the specificity of female oppression, it is denying the fact the females are institutionally discriminated against.
A white person may be the target of racist remarks, and I will fight against it, but a white person will never know the type of systematic racism that people of color have gone/go through, and to me, that is a bigger problem, for it is deeply rooted in our culture and ideologies, and is perpetrated at a societal level.

Basically, I have issue with the visibility that it takes away from minorities. I think it downplays targeted discrimination against oppressed minorities, while implying that it is in any way ballanced out, like : "i'm for the rights of people of color" ... " oh not me, i'm egalitarian" - as if it is more just to include white people, and really, it is not. Systemic racism is not a problem that affects all humans, it's a problem that affects people of color. And the same argument can be made for the rest of the oppressed minorities.

You think that Egalitarianism means to equally stretch yourself out over all issues. I disagree. I may be wrong, but i disagree all the same.

To me, Egalitarianism means the following.

- If I am aware of issues pertaining to black people (Like dealing with cops and the justice system) I am gonna rally behind reforms.
However, if I notice that women are now surpassing men when it comes to college admission and graduation, I will take up that torch and point out that our boys need a little love too. When women pay extra for hygiene products or are forbidden to take up combat arms, You bet your ass I will support that change as well.


That is it. You can choose to uplift one group at a time, so long as you don't discriminate against others and make movies that will hurt them. Talk about your issues, just don't act like someone is full of shit when they point out that male rape in prison is a real issue, and try to silence them on all fronts.

Basically, don't be a dick.

I find it strange that you take such pride in being slightly less inept when you're still laughably inept.

Okay.

[May90]

If others also do it in the name of Democracy, yes.

I am ignoring the fact that your example is manufactured to be as absurd and unrelated as possible

But yes. If people had written books about how Democracy demands that you go medieval on property. And several big name politicians also subscribed to that. And it was not unheard of to see a group of (Let's call them Sons of Liberty) acting in the way rad fems act and organize demonstrations on the "proper" form of democracy...

As well as the fact that the general population do not practice that democracy since you cannot claim that the entire population of the country/western world practice feminism and to do so would be a blatant lie,

Then yes I would say that Democracy has a problem since it is breeding some crazies and maybe the "Sons of Liberty" movement needs to police its own if it doesn't want to be seen as some kind of terrorist group.

Really? So, if I collect a thousand friends now, we will write a book each on how democracy demands that people break cars on the streets with medieval axes, spread the idea around, gain followers - then it will mean that democracy leads to cars broken with medieval axes? Just think about it for a second: democracy leads to cars broken with medieval axes. Does it make any sense at all to you?

In reality, what will happen is people will say, "Dafuq does it have to do with democracy? You are just a bunch of crazy nutters". And they will be right. So...

[hrugner]

It defies the social political leveraging mechanism typically called "salami slice strategy". A unifying movement isn't as big a political power opportunity as a divisive one as the more people you represent, the more people have say in your use of power. By representing only women, only homosexuals, only engineers, only plagiarists etc. you have more personal power over the total group. Similarly, if you want to remove the power of a large group, dividing the group up into smaller less powerful groups decreases the power of the whole. It also makes it easier to play them against one another. This is why the "neu-feminism" is so intent on forcing the "manosphere" concept, they need some sort of opposition to validate their behavior.

Most people probably are egalitarian as their goal, but we all fail from time to time as egalitarianism is a challenging ideal to maintain and foster.

[tj119]

Equality is a fairy tale, made up crock if shit. We are not all equal, never will be. People are by very nature judgemental, arrogant and discriminatory beings. We suck.

[Tempguy]

Really? So, if I collect a thousand friends now, we will write a book each on how democracy demands that people break cars on the streets with medieval axes, spread the idea around, gain followers - then it will mean that democracy leads to cars broken with medieval axes? Just think about it for a second: democracy leads to cars broken with medieval axes. Does it make any sense at all to you?

In reality, what will happen is people will say, "Dafuq does it have to do with democracy? You are just a bunch of crazy nutters". And they will be right. So...

Well yes. But as long as it follows in line with the reality of Feminism.

- If you write those books, and people actually buy it after you are actually published...
- And if you gain a lot of followers
- And your group would have a name. You would claim to follow Democracy (AKA Equality) If you do not follow that ideal and instead choose to break cars and shit, I would indeed say your group/organization/movement, should work on fixing itself.


I can start a group called Meninism, claim we are all for equality, but only go around harassing feminists, and that isn't saying that Equality is awful. That is basically my group being a bunch of dicsk and failing to police itself.


Hold on. You know that Feminism is a movement, and Equality is the ideal right? Like how "Sons of Liberty" (that name I gave you guys) would be the movement, and "Democracy" would be the ideal.