Trump Protesters

The most popular chant seems to be

“No Trump! No KKK! No fascist USA!”

Which I find perplexing. 

“No Trump” is a statement inherently against democracy. Whatever you don’t like about Trump, he was elected democratically.

“No KKK” at a Trump protest can be disregarded because no evidence has been presented that Trump has anything to do with the KKK. In stark contrast to Hillary who cited an ex KKK recruiter as “a mentor”.

“No fascist USA” is similarly pointless. Fascism has in it’s proper usage the following qualities;

“Fascism claims to be neither capitalistic nor socialistic.
It maintains private property but places its use under State
control. Class struggle is rejected and industrial disputes are
forbidden. Trade unions and manufacturers’ associations, both
Fascist-controlled, are to co-operate in the corporations. The party is anti-democratic and anti-liberal.”¹

Here fascism can be seen to be something not inherent in the political stance of the Republican party or Trump himself. In point of fact the socialistic, anti-liberal,  anti-democratic sentiments and class-struggle narratives seem to be held by the protesters themselves. 

¹ 1939 Penguin Political Dictionary

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Definitions

It’s subtle but right there in the definition;

the advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

Did you catch it?

It’s not “Equal rights for men and women” but “women’s rights”, the rest is subjective. There’s no call for women to have the same rights as men or visa versa, but the acquisition of rights in order to feel like they women aren’t put down. 

This is why the fact that women not only have all men’s legal rights, but have more rights than men, doesn’t bother them in the slightest.

It’s rare to to find a feminist who advocates for men’s rights because as soon as they realise what feminism really is, they stop being a feminist.

Posted in Feminism, MRA | Tagged , | Leave a comment

I’m a feminist*. But I’m not your Feminist.

Feminism is: Equal rights for men and women.

That’s Gender Egalitarianism by the way..

Women have all the rights that men have.

Men don’t have all the rights that women have.

Women are paid less than men.

Nowhere I have worked is this true. There’s laws against it.

Women are under-represented.

Everywhere I have worked has equal opportunity rules which only exclude; white men.

i.e. If an employer hires no white men, that’s the only time they won’t get in trouble.

Without introducing men into the equation this will likely create an unfair balance. It’s a good driver of demand for educated women in all areas of work, but where will it end? How can we ever pull the plug without being criticised by the indoctrinated public?

The Patriarchy!

What patriarchy?

There’s more male MPs than women.

THEN FUCKING VOTE FOR MORE FEMALE MPs, WITH THE EQUAL VOTING OPPORTUNITIES YOU HAVE!

We would but; Women don’t want to be MPs because of the Patriarchy.

The clue there is that they have a choice to end the dynamic, yet don’t. the opportunity to become and MP is there. Political education doesn’t take place on men-only golf courses.

The wage ga-

I don’t believe all these lies and biased propaganda you’re spreading which only result in women being placed higher than men.

You have to believe those, because that’s what we believe.

Then I’m not a feminist.

But Feminism is equal rights for men and women. You want that, yes?

Yes. But then you’re not a Feminist.

That’s the No True Scotsman Fallacy! You can’t tell us what we are!

Well then; I’ll go as far as to say that I’m a feminist up until around 2nd Wave theory.

Then you’re a misogynist! 

I thought this was a gender egalitarian movement?

It is.. we want equal rights for men and women. But only women are oppressed.

Show me where.

The Patriarchy!

What Patriarchy?

-Rinse and repeat-

*There are places in the world where the empowerment of women is being oppressed by patriarchal rape cultures who use religion as an excuse to place women beneath them. This is not an accurate description of US/UK. We fixed women’s rights here, how about we fix men’s rights too and use our feminist ideology (i.e. the understanding that women are the more oppressed of the sexes)  in places where it applies. Otherwise you’re just giving extra to an already disproportionately over-“privileged” and over-protected group because of a bias towards believing that things which were once true, are still true, under threat of ostracisation(?). Modern feminism has become dogmatic, with none-to-gentle handling of apostates. Lying about apostates to the faithful in order to keep them believing more lies. Does this sound familiar to any of my atheist readers?

Posted in Feminism, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Women can’t rape – guest post by @RobbieHalls w/ sources via @HoneyBadgerBite

image

Sexual assault upon men seems to be left out of the narrative I see every day from outspoken feminists who insist that there is a rape culture in US/UK when no definition of such a culture applies to most civilised western societies.

Rape of men by women isn’t something that can be legally prosecuted under UK law by legal definition despite it being unwanted penetration, it falls under sexual assault law. This detracts from the weight of the act indirectly by diminishing the social impact of statistics and reporting.

This needs to change.

Below* is the verbatim link dump from the HoneyBadgerRadio episode Rantzerker 41: Rutgers student femsplains Milo protest
Please watch, listen, understand, and support.

———————
*
38% of the victims of rape were men in the 2012 National Crime Victim Survey. (This study requires men to classify their victimization as rape and as a crime, both requirements lead to a reduction of admitted male victims relative to other survey instruments so this number is only a lower bound on the number of male victims of rape.)

http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2014.301946?journalCode=ajph

43% of college men and high school youth report being sexually assaulted or raped. 95% by women.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/men-a0035915.pdf

http://tinyurl.com/nsdsxgg

51% of college men report being sexually assaulted or raped since the age of 16. 95% by women.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/men-13-3-243.pdf

http://tinyurl.com/qgjzfwk

According to the CDC’s 12-month statistics on sexual violence(the most accurate statistic on prevalence, 50% of the victims of “forced sex” were male. According to the CDC’s lifetime statistics(the most accurate statistic regarding who is raping who) on who is perpetuating sexual violence, 80% of the men were raped by women. 

http://i.imgur.com/Ps9wW.jpg

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf

Here’s a recent world wide survey that found that 3% of college men men reported forced sex in their heterosexual relationships and 2.3% of college women reported forced sex in their heterosexual relationships. 

http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID45-PR45.pdf

Also recent results on sexual exploitation in correctional facility finds extremely high rates of female on male abuse.

“Approximately 95% of all youth reporting staff sexual misconduct said they had been victimized by female staff. In 2008, 42% of staff in state juvenile facilities were female.”

From “Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities Reported by Youth, 2008-09″

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf

“Most victims of staff sexual misconduct were males; most perpetrators were females. Among male victims of staff sexual misconduct, 69% of those in prison and 64% of those in jails reported sexual activity with
female staff. An additional 16% of prison inmates and 18% of jail
inmates reported sexual activity with both female and male staff.”

From “Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008-09″

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri0809.pdf

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Hilarious rants by emanuel14486948 in response to @Boing_Flip parody Tweets #follow

These rants by emanuel14486948 in response to the parody account @BoingFwip were so fantastically blinkered that I can’t resist just laying it out for your viewing pleasure. Enjoy 🙂

(I’ve highlighted my favourite bits in bold for my own pleasure)

BoingFwip:
“MT
@emanuel14486948: listen to science when i ask questions and i can prove the earth is spherical or the moon is real
#BoingFwip”

emanuel14486948:
“no you cant, because i can look through a telescope and see a lunar wave, when the hologram updates and moves slightly.
there is a real moon. Its in the bible, but there is another one used to make the earth seem round. And im pretty sure eclipses
Are fake.
you cant prove the earth is a sphere either because you would need a fulk view live video. You will never be able to get that
And if u think u have a full view live video of earth rotating and spherical, its a cgi video.
heres more for you. The sun is close, the moon can be seen over austrailia from nevada, and luminatee all seeing eye pyramid is
the bottom line is flat earth, the two sides are the angle of the suns rays and the eye is the sun.”

Boing_Flip:
“MT
@emanuel14486948: i know how to reason. Im smarter than the average man because Evolution makes me so.
#BoingFwip”

emanuel14486948:
“evolution cant make anyone smart btw, its a theory composed of ideas composes of assumptions and likelyhoods.
let my try to explain that. In a way you will understand. Different species cannot mate with one another even though their dna
Is nearly identical, example humans and chimps. A cro magnon or whatever can only mate with another and only produce a cro
Magnon. A caveman can only mate with another cave man and only produce a caveman etc etc. For humans to exist as they do today,
there had to be and adam and eve. Thats the bottom line. There is no arguing with that. You separate a fly from its own species
and change something and the fly adapts a little and is now no longer able to mate with its own species. You cant have a human
Come from a caveman. Dna does not allow it. Dna only allows the same species to mate. Adam and eve were real and they werent two
separately evolved cro magnons of the opposite sex who by chance were able to mate and not create a child that died in its youth
thats also common. Two slightly different species creating children that are stillborn or die early.
Dna corrects errors and does not allow evolution and crossbreeding. And please dont mention a Liger because thats not natural”

Posted in Evolution | Tagged | 3 Comments

Feminism and Philosophy – guest post by @TekThatEnglish

image

With almost the entirety of popular Feminist speakers proclaiming that Feminism is “simply the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities” to the point where this has become the definition described by most dictionaries, despite that this is very clearly “Gender Egalitarianism” and the very formation of the term “feminism” required the particular belief that observed women’s rights and opportunities were less that that of men’s, I thought it apt to allow the philosophical definition of feminism to be aired for consideration.

I’ve also included Humanism, which has of late become a more generalised catch-all for the secular advocation of rights for all humans regardless of ethnic origin, and sex etc.

Gender has a short piece but does not touch upon the gender spectrum and all its nuances which appear to be exponentially overcomplicating themselves as intersectional philosophies echo themselves around Tumblr instead of being studied psychologically as should be the case.

Feminism;

“The approach to social life, philosophy, and ethics that commits itself to correcting biases leading to the subordination of women or the disparagement of women’s particular experience and of the voices women bring to the discussion.
Contemporary feminist ethics is sensitive to the gender bias that may be implicit in philosophical theories (for instance, philosophers’ lists of virtues may be typically ‘manly’ or culturally masculine), and in social structures, legal and political procedures, and the general culture.
One controversial claim (made by Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development, 1982) is that women approach practical reasoning from a different perspective than that of men. The difference includes emphasis on community, caring, and bonding with particular individuals, in place of abstract impartiality. It is controversial whether or not this is a real difference, and if so whether it arises from innate differences in male and female psychology, or whether the different values reflect the way men and women have been taught to form different aspirations and ideals.

Feminist epistemology has asked whether different ways of knowing, for instance with different criteria of justification, and different emphases on logic and imagination,  characterise male and female attempts to understand the world. Such concerns include awareness of the ‘masculine’ self-image, itself a socially variable and potentially distorting picture of what thought and action should be. A particular target of much feminist epistemology is Kantian or Enlightenment conception of rationality, which is seen as a device for claiming mastery and control, and for refusing to acknowledge differing perspectives and different relations to life and nature.
Although extreme claims have been made, such as that logic is a phallic and patriarchal device for coercing other people, it is still unclear how differences between individual capacities, training, and culturally reinforced aspirations, work together in explaining how people aquire knowledge.
Again there is a spectrum of concern, from the highly theoretical the the relatively practical. In this latter area particular attention is given to the institutional biases that stand in the way of equal opportunities in science and other academic pursuits, or the ideologies that stand in the way of women seeing themselves as leading contributors to various disciplines.
However, to more radical feminists such concerns merely exhibit women wanting for themselves the same power and rights over others that men have claimed, and failing to confront the real problem, which is how to live without such asymmetrical powers and rights.”

Humanism;

“Most generally, any philosophy concerned to emphasise human welfare and dignity, and either optimistic about the powers of human reason, or at least insistent that we have no alternative but to use it as best we can.
More particularly, the movement distinctive of the Renaissance and allied to the renewed study of Greek and Roman literature: a rediscovery of the unity of human beings and nature, and a renewed celebration of the pleasures of life, all supposed lost in the medieval world.
Humanism in this Renaissance sense was quite consistent with religious belief, itself supposed that God had put us here precisely in order to further those things the humanists found important. Later the term tended to become appropriated for anti-religious social and political movements.
Finally, in the late 20th century, humanism is sometimes used as a pejorative term by postmodernist and especially feminist writers, applied to philosophies such as that of Sartre, that rely upon the possibility of the autonomous, self-conscious, rational, single self, and that are supposedly insensitive to the inevitable fragmentary, splintered, historically and socially conditioned nature of personality and motivation.”

Gender;

“The distinction between sex and gender is attributed to the anthropologist Margaret Mead (Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies, 1935). Sex is the biological category, whereas gender is the culturally shaped expression of sexual difference: the masculine way in which men should behave and the feminine way in which women should behave. It is emphasised by de Beauvoir that in this system woman is the Other: the kind of person whose characteristics are described by contrast with the male norm. It is a central aim of much feminist thought to uncover concealed asymmetries of power in deferences of gender, and to work for a society in which the polarisation of gender is abolished.”

Egalitarianism;

“The doctrine that moral and political life should be aimed at respecting and advancing the equality of persons.”

—————-
Addendum;

A note on Men’s Rights Advocates;
Someone who advocates for the rights of males.
i.e.
Men,
“Human males”
Rights,
“Legal rights exist in virtue of positive law; moral rights are sufficiently independent of it to give a platform from which legal arrangements may be criticised.”
Advocacy,
“Support for or recommendation of a particular cause or policy”

—————-

Sources; Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy by Simon Blackburn. ISBN 978-0-19-954143-0

Posted in Feminism | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Human Rights Philosophy – guest post by @TakeThatEnglish

Feminism;

“The approach to social life, philosophy, and ethics that commits itself to correcting biases leading to the subordination of women or the disparagement of women’s particular experience and of the voices women bring to the discussion.
Contemporary feminist ethics is sensitive to the gender bias that may be implicit in philosophical theories (for instance, philosophers’ lists of virtues may be typically ‘manly’ or culturally masculine), and in social structures, legal and political procedures, and the general culture.
One controversial claim (made by Carol Gilligan, In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development, 1982) is that women approach practical reasoning from a different perspective than that of men. The difference includes emphasis on community, caring, and bonding with particular individuals, in place of abstract impartiality. It is controversial whether or not this is a real difference, and if so whether it arises from innate differences in male and female psychology, or whether the different values reflect the way men and women have been taught to form different aspirations and ideals.

Feminist epistemology has asked whether different ways of knowing, for instance with different criteria of justification, and different emphases on logic and imagination,  characterise male and female attempts to understand the world. Such concerns include awareness of the ‘masculine’ self-image, itself a socially variable and potentially distorting picture of what thought and action should be. A particular target of much feminist epistemology is Kantian or Enlightenment conception of rationality, which is seen as a device for claiming mastery and control, and for refusing to acknowledge differing perspectives and different relations to life and nature.
Although extreme claims have been made, such as that logic is a phallic and patriarchal device for coercing other people, it is still unclear how differences between individual capacities, training, and culturally reinforced aspirations, work together in explaining how people aquire knowledge.
Again there is a spectrum of concern, from the highly theoretical the the relatively practical. In this latter area particular attention is given to the institutional biases that stand in the way of equal opportunities in science and other academic pursuits, or the ideologies that stand in the way of women seeing themselves as leading contributors to various disciplines.
However, to more radical feminists such concerns merely exhibit women wanting for themselves the same power and rights over others that men have claimed, and failing to confront the real problem, which is how to live without such asymmetrical powers and rights.”

Humanism;

“Most generally, any philosophy concerned to emphasise human welfare and dignity, and either optimistic about the powers of human reason, or at least insistent that we have no alternative but to use it as best we can.
More particularly, the movement distinctive of the Renaissance and allied to the renewed study of Greek and Roman literature: a rediscovery of the unity of human beings and nature, and a renewed celebration of the pleasures of life, all supposed lost in the medieval world.
Humanism in this Renaissance sense was quite consistent with religious belief, itself supposed that God had put us here precisely in order to further those things the humanists found important. Later the term tended to become appropriated for anti-religious social and political movements.
Finally, in the late 20th century, humanism is sometimes used as a pejorative term by postmodernist and especially feminist writers, applied to philosophies such as that of Sartre, that rely upon the possibility of the autonomous, self-conscious, rational, single self, and that are supposedly insensitive to the inevitable fragmentary, splintered, historically and socially conditioned nature of personality and motivation.”

Gender;

“The distinction between sex and gender is attributed to the anthropologist Margaret Mead (Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies, 1935). Sex is the biological category, whereas gender is the culturally shaped expression of sexual difference: the masculine way in which men should behave and the feminine way in which women should behave. It is emphasised by de Beauvoir that in this system woman is the Other: the kind of person whose characteristics are described by contrast with the male norm. It is a central aim of much feminist thought to uncover concealed asymmetries of power in deferences of gender, and to work for a society in which the polarisation of gender is abolished.”

—————-

Sources; Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy ISBN 978-0-19-954143-0

Posted in Feminism | Tagged , | Leave a comment