You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

I don't see how a gender equality movement can justify ignoring half the problems on the basis on the very thing they claim to want to make equal.

If women got longer jail sentences for the same crime, would feminists fight that? Of course they would. There's only one reason they aren't on it. It happens to men. If they were TRULY for equality, why would that stop them? If you want men and women to be treated equally, you can't discriminate which ineqaulities to fight on the basis of gender. In other words, if you want the genders to be treated equally, you need to start doing it yourself. If your movement doesn't care about half the population, why should it care about you?

I don't think feminists fight against men's rights. They just don't fight FOR them. Their plan seems to be to get their rights and run.

I've only tried to argue for true equality, but I can't even get the feminists of amirite behind that much, which says something to me.

And about your MLK comparison: If whites, instead of blacks, were forced to the back of the bus, I'd like to think MLK would fight against that, too.

It is more understandable in certain other countries, but I'm still not a fan of the name. It makes it sound like one is for women's rights, not because they are rights, but because they're women.

+11 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “I don't see how a gender equality movement...

You bring up a GREAT point: IF whites were forced to sit in the back, MLK would fight for them too. If whites suffered as blacks did, MLK would fight for them. If, meaning they don't. They didn't come CLOSE to suffering as much as blacks did. That's why MLK didn't fight for them. That's why.

If men faced as much sexism as women did, hell to the **** yeah I'd fight for them, and I have great confidence that other women would too. After all, we fight for each other. But they DON'T face that sexism. Do you see what I'm getting at?? Men DON'T FACE that shit, which is why feminism prioritizes women. They face struggles, obviously, but not nearly as much as women do and we both know it.

THIS. is how I justify feminism fighting for women and not for men. True equality is egalitarianism, which is what I (and many other feminists) are! Frankly, it's a bit ridiculous to insist a group for WOMEN should fight for MEN, as if both suffer the same. It's like asking why we can't have a straight pride parade or white history month. Feminism gender equality with a focus on women, which is absolutely justified. Feminism and egalitarianism can, and do, coexist. Feminists do not work against men or want special privileges, that's all I want to convince to you.

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

I explained why.
"You can take on the biggest inequalities if you want. If they happen to be all black issues, then so be it. If it got to the point where the issues were spread out evenly across both sides and he still focused on black rights, I'd question MLK's intentions, too."

It's right there. No one's ignoring you.

Looking at your questions makes me feel that you might not have understood my point at all. You're making me beat a dead horse at this point. I don't feel like going through it all again.

0 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “I explained why. "You can take on the...

That did not answer my question. "If they happen to be all black issues, so be it." Women are still just as oppressed in some areas as blacks were during MLK's time. You can be a feminist in the US and fight for women's rights elsewhere! Women are no longer oppressed, but the issues are not spread out evenly. Feminism is about closing that gap.

I feel like you're just being contradictory and don't want to admit it. You admitted your point was that feminists fight against men's rights. Is that confirmed? Because you confirmed it before. Or is it your point that you can't be for equality without fighting for both sides? I tried to show your blatant contradiction with MLK's circumstance...like I don't know how else to understand your point

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

You want to be a feminist in one of those places, go nuts. I have no problem with it. But it's not the same in the States, where men have 40% longer jail times for the same crime, where male spousal abuse isn't taken seriously by the police or the media, and where men have less child custody rights. Women aren't oppressed in the US and there's no reason they can't fight these issues too. I can't get behind a "gender equality" movement that hardly even acknowledges that these problems exist.

0 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “You want to be a feminist in one of those...

Oh my god, I'm not downplaying men's problems! I know they face serious problems. I agree whole heartedly that they deserve to be equal with women. THAT IS WHAT I'M SAYING! Men and women deserve to be equal! That's feminism! Many women do fight for men's rights as well!

Um, if women arent oppressed than neither are men, unless you'd like to make the case that men have less rights than women in the US. So should people not fight for men's rights either? Because they're not oppressed?

You're ignoring me when I call you out on your double standard. Why was it ok for MLK but not for feminists?

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

At the time, blacks suffered terrible inequalites. That was the biggest deal regarding equality, so he naturally took them on. I'd like to think that maybe he'd do the same for whites if the playing field was more even.

You can take on the biggest inequalities if you want. If they happen to be all black issues, then so be it. If it got to the point where the issues were spread out evenly across both sides and he still focused on black rights, I'd question MLK's intentions, too.

We've both made our points, so if we still don't see eye to eye, we'll agree to disagree.

011 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “At the time, blacks suffered terrible...

First of all, you're being extremely and ignorantly dismissive of women's rights issues. Maybe you're not affected daily, which is awesome, but you can't deny that in places around the world women are being just as repressed as blacks were in MLK's times. I can't just go with your subjective interpretation of what's an even playing field. Malala in Pakistan was shot for promoting female education! Women in these countries get acid poured on them if they want to leave their marriages! In some places they can't even ride bicycles or drive a car or even leave the house without a male with them! People are still defending rapists, even here. You see people trying to regulate women's bodies by trying to restrict access to birth control or abortion. Gender roles are still strong. Playing fields are more level than they were years ago, thank God, but they are not level.

You're saying that MLK only addressed black issues and you're okay with it! Can you see eye to eye with me here that it's okay for women to do that as well??

+121 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

1. I don't think feminists fight against mens' rights.

2. The fact that feminism doesn't regard men is what makes me question their intentions. As I've said, you aren't truly for equality unless you fight against every unfairness. Not just when you're the one getting the short end of the stick.

3. I don't think feminists want to be above men. Nor do I think they want to subdue men, so I can't answer your question.

4. My only point is that people shouldn't be "feminists" or something ridiculous like "masculinists." If you really want equality, you have to fight for it on both sides. Not one or the other. Men and their problems are irrelevant to feminism. That's the problem. How can you say feminism is for equality when it ignores half the population and also ignores half the gender inequalities? Their field shouldn't be fighting inequality towards women, it should be fighting inequality towards any gender.

-22 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “1. I don't think feminists fight against...

What? I said, quote "you think feminists fight against men's rights. Is that your point or is it not?" and you said, quote "You're right, that was my point." Um?

I don't understand why you think that just because a movement doesn't address the opposite side makes them "not truly for equality." The point is that they're not trying to alter the other side. They're trying to alter their own side so that they're equal to the opposite side. It's like walking on a ladder. If the other side is 2 rungs ahead of you, the focus isn't to move them up because that's kinda not the point. Some feminists want to move everyone up, but some only want to be equal with their counterparts, regardless of which rung they're all on. That's my point: some feminists only want equality - pure equality - between sexes. Men and women could live in dirt huts for all they care; they just want equality. Some feminists want complete rights for both sexes, but the ones that aren't focused on that have no obligation to mind the other side. Feminism isn't necessarily a movement for completely morality. It's just a movement for equality among sexes. That's all.

If you don't think people should be "feminists," then how come you think it's okay for people to advocate black's rights? Martin Luther King talked about equality for whites and blacks. He never said anything specific about fighting against injustices against whites. That just wasn't his focus. His goal was to move the black population up on the ladder until it's equal with the whites. Why is that justified but feminism isn't?

+22 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

I didn't insult you. I told you your assumptions were wrong and that you should reread my comments. Seems harmless, but you lost your cool. I've made my arguments and like I said, I'm not reiterating them. You're right, that was my point. But that's not what you said. You said that I must think that those who take part in civil rights must want whites to suffer, as if I think feminists want men to suffer.

I told you, when you assume, you get shit wrong. You seem offended, but I meant it as honest advice. Taking advice doesn't make you below the person. The main reason I didn't argue against your point is like I told you, it was a baseless assumption.

I'll keep replying, but try to avoid petty insults like "****" and "third-grader." You must be better than that.

-11 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “I didn't insult you. I told you your...

Alright. Let's just both chill the **** out and be civil.

You said you think feminists fight against men's rights. I said that I disagree--I think feminism solely deals with women's rights alone. That's it. I think the issue of men's rights really just depends on the individual feminist because feminism itself really doesn't focus on men's rights positively or negatively. Some issues might overlap but in general feminism deals with women's rights alone. I believe it doesn't even regard men.

Secondly, if you believe feminists want to be above men, how come you don't believe civil rights activists want to be above whites? Some feminists don't fight for men being treated equally in child custody. Well, some blacks don't fight against black racism against whites which totally exists. Some gay rights activists don't fight against discrimination against straight people. Why? Because it's irrelevant to their field. THAT'S what I'm trying to get across. Feminists have no obligation to even have an opinion on men's rights. They can choose to believe anything they wish on men's rights. Just like how it's irrelevent what their favorite food is, it's completely unrelated to feminism what their stance on men's rights is. Feminism neither fights for nor against men's rights.

If you thought the goal of feminism was to subdue men when in actuality it is to fight for a female boost in equality, then I'm not quite sure why you would think it a "baseless assumption" for me to think that you believe the same for other movements as well. Let me ask you this: what makes the movements so different?

+11 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

Try to read my comments again. Your assumptions are invalid and baseless. You misunderstood my point completely and I don't feel like reiterating it. When you make assumptions, you get shit wrong.

-66 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “Try to read my comments again. Your...

Chill out, ****. I read your goddamn comments and the only thing I got from it was that you think feminists fight against men's rights. Is that your point or is it not?

The moment someone says a comment like yours, I immediately understand that you literally have no more ways to defend yourself. Maybe instead of pretending like I'm somehow below you, you could reply with, I don't know, an actual argument? Like, what?

Yeah, see, condescension is not an argument. It just proves you have nothing else to contribute towards your point. Look, I'm always willing to admit I'm wrong. It's an important part of debate. But if you write comments like that, it's not quite working towards the goal of proving yourself right.

But if you, or anyone else wants to reply to my comment, I really actually want to hear a counterargument perhaps without the voice of a whiny third-grader.

+2311 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

58% agree
42% disagree
Post

Which situation do they fight inequality towards men?

-213 Reply

Discord Discord

In response to “Which situation do they fight inequality...

I dont think you understand. Feminism focuses on women's rights. Individual feminists can focus also on men's rights, gay rights, animal rights, blue rights, green rights, whatever. Some feminists can also be against all those rights. It depends on the person. The only thing unifying feminists is women's rights. Feminism doesn't specify anything about men's rights or a lack thereof--that's a whole other issue that depends on the personal preferences of each feminist. Most, I would say, promote general equality because they know how bad sexism feels. By what you're saying, I bet you also believe all who believe in civil rights want whites to suffer or all who believe in gay rights want straight people to suffer. That's really not how it works.

+231 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

73% agree
27% disagree
Post

You can see some truths in other religions without believing that it is the one truth. Like I think there is a lot of truth in Buddhism, but I don't think it's the one truth.

+11 Reply

Fanatic

In response to “You can see some truths in other religions...

You can be an atheist and still admire parts of other religions. I could think there's some truth in Buddhism or Christianity. For example, I could adhere my moral code to the Christian one but not find the other parts true.

+33 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

From this comment, I can tell you definitely missed the point because you didn't even address it. Go back to my comment and replace the word race with culture, I think it might make the point more clear. There's not a way to judge an applicant on culture, so don't.

+11 Reply

Frank_n_Furter Frank_n_Furter

In response to “From this comment, I can tell you definitely...

I thought you were talking about something else..my bad.

I still think that the more lower achieving minorities still should get the leg up because most of them face societal challenges that others can't understand. I get that not all of them face it, but it's obvious that there is still racism in the culture that may force some students to feel unworthy simply because of their race. I think it's important for colleges to recognize that and just consider it a bit when deciding.

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

No, I knew exactly what you meant and I didn't think it was racist. You completely missed the point of my comment, though. Correlation=/= causation and you can't go giving people advantages or disadvantages because or correlation, you have to do it based off causation, so while one race may be correlated with this, you don't go giving all people of that race because of that correlation, you find out why it's correlated (they go to ** schools) and give people who go to ** schools advantages.

+11 Reply

Frank_n_Furter Frank_n_Furter

In response to “No, I knew exactly what you meant and I...

I did not miss the point. I never said race causes difference in scoring. I said culture does, which I think can be best identified by race. I don't believe there's really a way to judge an applicant based on culture.

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

Just because people of a certain race are more likely to be disadvantaged doesn't mean all people of that race need a leg up, any race can come from any disadvantaged area, even if one race is more statistically likely to come from that area, all those people from that area need help, not just people of a certain race from that area, you shouldn't just give someone a leg up because people of their race are statistically more likely to need it, that doesn't automatically mean everyone of that race does. Correlation=/=causation in statistics. It's important to look at the other factors. Ie: they don't need help because they're black, they need help because they're poor. They don't not need help because they're white, they don't need it because their family is well off. Instead of saying they need help because their race and they don't because of their race, look at the underlying factors and decide if they need it or not.

+11 Reply

Frank_n_Furter Frank_n_Furter

In response to “Just because people of a certain race are...

It sounds like I'm being discriminatory towards races, which is not what I'm trying to do. What I'm really saying is that CULTURE, which is mostly identified with race, causes a difference in scores/achievement. I'm not trying to say all members of a certain race value education the same way, nor that race causes intelligence, as you think I tried to say, but we all know how, for example, Asian Americans typically score higher than many other races, right? It's not that they're even smarter as a race, it's just a cultural thing that they value education more than others.

I think many people look over the cultural sources of test scores. Culture is identified very much so with race, and I don't think that can be denied. I don't mean to say that some races don't care about intelligence but that it's not a central concern; success may be defined by much more than an IQ.

Kids who grow up in this culture face these challenges, which are different than the typical Asian American whose parents play a heavy role. This isn't something you can quantitatively measure. You can't interview a parent about their involvement.

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

88% agree
12% disagree
Post

I am of a race that is hurt by affirmative action, but I still support it. I think it's important to understand that certain cultures within America don't emphasize education as much as the others. The fact is that some races score lower than others, not because they're dumber, but because their environment on average values education less. Plus, these races also face worse economic and family situations. These people have had to overcome more difficult circumstances than others.

I get what you're saying though, since race doesn't determine intelligence or things like that, but I feel like on average certain races value intelligence differently.

-33 Reply

anonon

I like my rights and would rather not go back to a time where I'd be treated like the dirt of society. With more time comes more rights.

+132 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

62% agree
38% disagree
Post

Religion isn't viable now. Its followers just choose to ignore that. As I said above, it all comes down to faith. And if there is nothing backing up your beliefs except faith, then your beliefs are not viable.

-415 Reply

AtheisticMystic AtheisticMystic

In response to “Religion isn't viable now. Its followers just...

Religion is definitely viable. Just look at how many people are religious and how long people have been religious. It's nonsensical, I know, but it's definitely popular enough to survive for pretty much since the day civilization began.

+11 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

43% agree
57% disagree
Post

It's annoying when they're deliberately trying to make it as offensive as possible to a specific audience.

If you tell a holocaust joke to a holocaust survivor who has no intentions of hearing it, you can go **** yourself.

+771 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

55% agree
45% disagree
Post

I mean, sure the tone can come of as demeaning, but I don't think the actually message behind it is offensive at all. She's saying that, as Christians, we think the most important thing to do is to love others as God loved us. Atheists don't think that way. That's not a bad thing. It doesn't make them any worse than Christians. It's just different

0 Reply

Fanatic

In response to “I mean, sure the tone can come of as...

I never said I disagreed with that sentiment. I just think that the "holier than thou" attitude was overwhelming. She played it off as being better than others by having "higher standards" and that is just utter bs.

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

55% agree
45% disagree
Post

Ignore them. I'm Atheist and I don't think you were saying either of what they said and that your reasoning is solid and unoffensive.

011 Reply

Frank_n_Furter Frank_n_Furter

In response to “Ignore them. I'm Atheist and I don't think...

If you dont sense any tone of superiority or self-satisfaction in that comment then we must be reading different things.

0 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

55% agree
45% disagree
Post

Sometimes when someone bashes me on amirite for my beliefs, I think "why are they doing this? Why are they so hateful?" But then I remember that because they aren't christians, they are not morally obligated to show love. They can be as damn hateful as they please. Just because I hold myself to a certain stands, doesn't mean I should hold others to the same.

-224 Reply

BetterThanEzra1119 BetterThanEzra1119

In response to “Sometimes when someone bashes me on amirite...

Oh for crying out loud. Stop. Theists are *not* any nore moral than an atheist. Stop being so self-satisfied.

-11 Reply

anonon

You disagreed. (Undo) (Show Numbers)

68% agree
32% disagree
Post

It's not so much as why do monkeys still exist, more of why can't we find an in-between creature between monkeys and humans.

-7310 Reply

Anonymous

In response to “It's not so much as why do monkeys still...

HUMANS DID NOT EVOLVE FROM MONKEYS

10 minutes in a basic biology class would've had that covered. MONKEYS (and other like species) are the "in between" between HUMANS and the extinct COMMON ANCESTOR. The species branched out like a tree. Some became monkeys, some became gorillas, and some humans. It's really not all that mindblowing. It's disgusting that people who deny evolution even exist in the 21st century.

+12164 Reply

anonon

Find out your friends' opinions

Amirite is the premier opinion-based social network where people from all around the world discover, debate and discuss today's hottest issues. Share your perspective to the world and interact with like-minded individuals on breaking news, hot topics and controversial issues now!

With that many angles, the discussions on Amirite will open your eyes to a panoramic view of your world that you won't get anywhere else, allowing you to see the big picture and discuss it.

Every opinion matters on Amirite.

Sign up to have your opinion heard!

It only takes a second.
Connect with Facebook, Twitter or Google.

or create an account with your email...

Sign Up Already Have An Account?

Login to your Amirite account...

Login Forgot Your Details? Need An Account?

Enter your email address and we'll email you your account details.

Send Details Back To Login Form

Login using...

Login

Forgotten username or password?
We'll send you your username and a new password.

Email Address

Login

Sign up to have your opinion heard!

Show posts as Grid List

By creating an account you indicate that you have read and agree to abide by our rules.

Create My Account