Male Privilege

See the thing you fail to understand is that privilage is a one way street. If a man is privilage in aspects of his life than a woman is not. And vice versa. Your entire argument this whole time is that women are not privilaged in many areas and men are, and make it out constantly that you are the victim of some horrible injustice when you clearly are not.

If I have some privilages that you do not, and you have some privilages that I do not, then we are equal as beings and your whole argument this entire time has been for absolutely nothing. Your feminist ideals have no place here because we are already equal. But the problem is not that men and women are privilaged differently it's that you want what a man has without giving up what you have as a woman. That is not equality, that is selfishness.

I've asked you many times to provide links and discuss specific things and not once have you done it. You have not once addressed the crime rate being male and how that effects male image in society, you have not address the homeless rate amount males, you have not address the education rates amoung males, you have not address the false rape rates against males.

And you're still sitting there accusing me of not knowing privilage and not backing up my arguments. I have asked you time and again for specifics which you have failed to provide.






WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU SMOKING! You think that being pulled into the draft is a bloody privilage. You have some serious mental issues. There's not way to suger coat just how messed up in the head you are to think that being forced to go to war and die is a privilage. It's a outrage of human society to be forced to kill another human for any reason and you happen to believe that it's a privilage.

All I can say is that god have mercy on your soul.

It's funny that you don't realize privilege applies to other aspects of people besides sex. I'm talking racial, class, sexuality, and ability privileges combined with anyone of the female sex, fool.
For example, as I mentioned previously in this very thread, as an upper-middle-class white straight able bodied female, I most fucking certainly have privileges.

I don't see the draft as a privilege, I was referring to the laws surrounding it only applying to males. If you read the very quote I was replying to, that would be rather damn clear.

We're not talking about racial privilage, or class privilage or ability privilage. That was clearly stated. We are talking about male privilage and female privilage. That is all we are talking about, stop trying to change the subject and twist it to your own logic.

The laws around the draft aren't privilage either. Anything to do with the draft whatsoever is not a privilage. If you don't see the draft as a privilage, than the laws around the draft can not be a privilage cause you can't have one without the other.

Do you even read my posts or just look at certain lines and respond?

I was pointing out how off track you were getting to begin with, really. Also, I'm staying the fuck out of this thread for now as it's pretty clear everyone's just intent on either specifically hating on a) my arguments, or gaslighting them, or b)feminism as a whole in general.

Also, learn to spell if you're going to bother posting in SD. The rest of the forum will thank you.

A "privilege" with which Leon Panetta revoked a month ago, a "privilege" to which if you honestly asked most men who served, if they thought of it as a "privilege", it would differ.

"Privilege" in serving the country? Some think that, others, like me, acknowledge that it's the right to get your freaking head blown off. Quite literally as it pertains to the current ME Wars, and the roadside bombings, suicide bombings and land mines.

Do you even know what a 'privilege' is? Were the German Mercenaries privileged to fight a war for Britain that had absolutely no implications for Germany? To die for an empire that didn't in so much as care for their interests? They got money for it, whoop dee damn do.

The worst case scenario, is that as this supplies more fooder for the military(Oh, sorry, I mean soldiers) this can only encourage our government and our military generals. For whom, more body bags is the merrier.

Women were in fact privileged not to fight wars, they were privileged to have their domestic needs taken care of, above all else. Women were privileged to be courted, now they've denied their own privileges.

I watched that movie, and between the blatant disrespect of the men to whom they were negotiating, as well as the disrespect of benevolent marriages and their benevolent partners, perhaps the most enlightening statement came at the end(and it came from a woman):

"The problem with Feminism, is that it teaches women to be victims"

You think? The whole Movement is filled with self hating, self loathing and contemptible principles and people.

You got me, i don't like feminism in general.
There is plenty of problems in feminism to hate it.
Also radical feminists are shining star among feminism, and kinda ruin it for everyone, including feminists. (Im speaking about people who want to do national castration day and stuff like that)
And usually its radical feminists that actually lead everyone else giving off bad image and rotten ideals.

on small off topic:
I got no information on this, but i think reason why females where not accepted in war was due to fact that if you "village" was conquered opponent may kill all combatants, and if females where fighters to, they would be killed as well leading to result of no one being left to take care of kids and elderly.

Rather than being feminists people should be humanitarians or whatever the correct naming for that is, and watch out for human rights.

Or you could be animal loving person and look for animal rights or something if you don't like humans much that is.

There is no such thing as a "radical" Feminist, being a Feminist IS radical: The rejection of their spouses, significant others. The freedom to do "whatever they want" with their body(IE:The most degenerative clothing and sexual attitudes)Hell, the idea that they would even want a committed relationship. And if so, totally on a whim. If women wonder why men practice infidelity today, they might want to look at the fact that their feminist position means they couldn't give two shits.

If you treat a person with value and respect, they tend to stick around. When Feminists can't even respect themselves, asking them to respect a significant other(or their offspring) is wholly laughable.

To be a Feminist is akin to a male mutilating his skin. The male's degrading himself, no? The entire Feminist Movement is degrading by its very nature.

You just compared a woman's natural, God-given right to self-determinate and pursue happiness and fulfillment as defined by herself, to self-mutilation.

You are an extremely sick, misguided person. Perhaps you should move to the middle east, where your ideals are enforced upon threat of stoning.

It was a very poorly worded example. I don't really agree with some of the things you've said either, LustfulAngel. Feminism isn't only for radicals. The feminists we hear about more often are the radical ones, true. There are still feminists that are reasonable and trying to keep things eaqual. Well, I don't know if we're equal or not. GizGal said our privilege was not knowing what our privileges are, which didn't help the debate move on.

To be a feminist is akin to someone protecting and fighting for their rights and identity. Well it was till the radicals fucked it up. My view: Feminists constantly put down their own gender by showing what the other gender has and saying they are supirior because of it, and turned a brilliant and powerful movement in to a product of hate and disgust. Where they seem to fixate on what one side has, and forget about their own adventages. And can you stop calling the army a death sentance.

I think males and females are as equal as they're gonna be. Really, women have it better but I might be wrong, I can't look at it from the female perspective without some male bias. In my opinion, past this point women will have a very notable lead in power. And it will be much harder for men to call for equallity.

What about the Fetus's god-given right to life? Oh WAIT! That proves another point Loli: Murder isn't acceptable, I don't care if it's a fetus, if it's a child or if it's an adult. It's a living human being.

Worse yet, it's a living being that due to biological reasons cannot speak out nor act in it's own defense. Do you know where it comes from? Eugenics. As in forceful human breeding. In an attempt to find the Human Superman, as once described by Fredick Nietzsche.

So between your fantatical, ideological rebellion which taken to its extreme opposes the very existence of men, and allows for the murder of babies actually has its history in far right German politics.

Shocker, isn't it Loli?

May I ask that we avoid topics such as abortion and such? I hope to keep this topic on track.

We're speaking of "Male Privilege"(Which I and a few others has proven doesn't in fact exist in the modern age.), which in turn brings about the Feminist discussion, which in large part deals with the degradation of the feminine

Abortion is a very large part of that degradation(of humanity overall), for the only defense applicable being: "It's our choice". It would be very interesting if fetus's could develop telepathic communication and asked for the chance of life, what would Loli do in that situation?

A choice, at the expense of another is sickening. And if this nation is going to talk about life, liberty and independence, then it needs to be serious.

According to the numbers, 5,000 lives were taken via back door abortions. 53 million lives have been taken via legal abortion, and according to a recent study, about as many as 300,000 women are affected with Breast Cancer.

http://www.lifenews.com/2012/11/26/study-shows-abortion-linked-to-high-breast-cancer-risk/

Does anyone see anything wrong here? The Feminist idea of reform is totally backwards from actually improving the quality of life.

ROFL OMG YOU DO KNOW THAT ENTIRE "STUDY" WAS SHOWN TO BE A HUGE SCAM, SURELY?
AS FUCKING LONG AGO AS 1997.
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/01/09/us/big-study-finds-no-link-in-abortion-and-cancer.html
http://ww5.komen.org/BreastCancer/FactorsThatDoNotIncreaseRisk.html

God now you've just done all the work FOR me, ha, way to shoot your own credibility down quickly more than you already have! Christ, I actually laughed aloud when I saw you posted that tripe.

The whole bullshit "abortion causes breast cancer" argument has been used among conservative pseudo-scientific communities for ages. It's extremely fucked up, misleading, and sad that people are still buying into the shit they peddle.

Ouch, sounds like I hit a nerve when someone has to type in all capitals. Furthermore, referencing a 1997 study. REALLY? Furthermore, I'd like to take notice that the particular study I linked to was in Asia, not America.

The different dynamics also impacts Case studies(IE: In China, a case study is more likely to be accurate than in America)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kioSuxh2QIw

When we talk psuedo-science, most liberal tree nuthuggers believe we have an impact on the earth's climate. A suggestion about as logical as stating that we can control people's thoughts.

Yes, it's a complete shocker that you've survived this long without being beaten to death. There's no point in arguing with you about anything, because in the psychotic depths of your mind, you're right. You feel you cannot possibly wrong, simply because you believe so strongly in your supposedly 'valiant' crusade to save the 'feminine'. You have no idea what you're talking about, ever, when you discuss women's rights and movement for equality.

You're not fit for Serious Discussion, because you completely ignore facts, statistics, and evade any attempt to grasp even the slightest understanding of socioeconomics. You'd much rather cite bygone eras as having been the ideological golden age. [Bygone eras, I might add, that were infamous for their objectification and degradation of women as being lesser, and not to be taken seriously in -any- profession.]

Carry on with these views, and you will never know the love of a self-respecting woman, because in your opinion, self-respect is adhering to your idea of perfection. And by the way.. those are completely contradicting concepts.

This is becoming off topic of male privilage but since you seem to want to tie it in, I believe you are wrong. Abortion is not some degrading to humanity, infact it is something that is benificial to society as a whole. Children born to unprepared parents are vastely more likely to end up as criminals and vastely more likely to become school drop outs. 80% of children born to unprepared parents are likely to live thier entire lives in poverty. 90% of children born to unprepared parents will turn to drugs in their life time, and 40% of children will become teen parents.

75% of children born to teen parents are likely to become teen parents themselves.

Abortion isn't just an option of my body my choice. It is also an option of benifit for the child in the situations that you are in. It is also consistant that parents who have abortions go one to become parents of multiple children later in life.

Do you ever sometimes get the feeling you're talking about yourself? Particularly when you proclaim that I don't know what I'm talking about. I just traced Abortion back to Eugenics, which goes back to 20th century Europe at the time of WW2!

It's also interesting to say that I ignore 'statistics and facts' when I'm the one posting links all the time, citing sources. And when you have women activists(such as the ones I linked to a page or two ago acknowledging the socio economic flaws of Feminism) and making the same arguments as myself, how can you even suggest I lack understanding of these issues?


Your greatest ignorance and the greatest ignorance of the females at the time, was the absurd suggestion that the very idea of being a committed partner in a relationship was objectification. Feminists have made this statement, and what has been your response to your new found freedom?

Sex strip clubs, skimpy clothing(More out in Public), ETC. The very objectification you supposedly fought against. All men wanted to establish was a strong middle class family. And the idea of a wife and children, completing his life.

Objects? If so, of the spiritual sense rather than the materialistic one, unlike today where you feminists have encouraged the materialistic objectification of sexuality. Is this still, yet freedom?

Hell, as I said to Gizgal and now to you(Though in your ignorance, your incapability of understanding renders any logic absolutely useless): You proclaim equality, Gizgal made the absurd argument that men enjoy privileges.

What privileges do men enjoy today in 2013? Men actively search for relationships: For women a relationship is now a past time, a child a hassle.(And in fact, if worst comes to worst, she becomes a baby butchering murderer legalized by the State).

Even supposing you, the God Woman in your blessful heart grants the man his family and his child; if for any reason it shouldn't work out rather than shared custody and responsibilities, the man is expected to pick up the tab while the mother takes
care of the child, thereby eliminating the father from the child's life.


Feminism is the advent of selfishness that far exceeds any wrong doing that the previous structure may have done to women. And like any destructive selfishness, much the same as the drug addict you are utterly unaware of your own pitfalls.

There is sadly, no known therapy for stupidity.

BAHAHAHAHHAHA HOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLY SHIT YOU ARE TOO FAR GONE, DUDE.

I'm out, this is just cracking me up at this point. X'D

As I said to Loli, do you ever find yourself talking to yourself? Because never once have I framed my arguments with pure capitals, even as I find myself annoyed by the incompetence behind the failed mainstream rebellion and its consequences to men and women.

If your the mainstream American female of today, then god help this country. From amongst the lot of you I wouldn't nominate a leader either.

But as you said, you're out. I just wanted to take the time thank you, your post if rather utterly useless allowed me to respond in a more sensible fashion to Jacob.

You point out a video that lays out an argument that abortion helps reduce unwanted pregnancies, which in turn reduce future crime rates. However, as the video points out(and the one conducting the study denied it rather flatly and not convincingly) is that these rates do not take into account the obvious racial implications in Abortion.


http://www.nbccongress.org/features/abortion_silent_no_more_01.asp

35% of Blacks is a very significant minority number, especially considering other minorities. Abortion is basically eugenics against minorities, the unspoken crime of humanity in America.

Also, not mentioned in the crime rate/abortion discussion is the economic factors:
http://prospect.org/article/demographics-abortion-its-not-what-you-think

A whole 69% of those seeking abortion are economically disadvantaged. Taken in the reverse, this means that if they weren't economically disadvantaged, they may not actually have an abortion. And the crime rate among families that have a sufficient income, logically are of course significantly less.

The article above hopes more contraceptives will solve the issue of economic inequality? HAH. When considering the costs of health care, abortions and insurance, these very solutions are causing the problem.

Heartbleeding Liberals take the opposite route to the correct solution: Illegal Immigration should be dealt with harshly, the currently 11 million illegal immigrants are not citizens of this country and aren't entitled to anything in this country.

The health benefits, the jobs that they take from legal American Women(which is a part of this 69% number), etc.

How about significantly lowering, if not completely eliminating Marriage Taxes? Why do Married Couples have a significant economic disadvantage over Singles?

Because of higher taxes and inflation, the two-parent working households of the feminist ideal failed completely. Higher wages meant more for government to spend and take away from people's pockets.

Therefore, the one(male) worker society was actually more sustainable for females. Even though their income was lower, the economy adjusted for that making it affordable.

Making work hours more flexible is certainly an approach we could try, but why should companies be forced to adjust to the demands of their employees? There has to be a benefit to the company, one could argue that benefit would be that the woman worker would feel more confident and more stable as a career woman.

But this 'flexibility' means there's a gap in working hours, the company would then logically try to fill this gap either with hopefully A: Internal workers, or likely B: Outside workers(This would be a great way for men to reclaim the jobs they lost to Feminism).

If it's B, Females will once again find themselves in the same position they were pre-1969. Only, I don't think it would be held up as discriminatory. Rather, it's a business's MO to decide if they would like more consistent, around the clock workers.

Even in the advent of Feminism and their access to higher career opportunities, the reality is the necessity of the male to complete the female's life. The Feminist, such as Loli and Gizgal would never want to admit that. Because to admit that, is to submit to what I said:

Feminism, in its outset is self defeating and hadn't even accomplished what they wanted. To be fair, its because it couldn't logically be accomplished.

Do you see female animals separating from their male herds?

I am sorry and I do not mean to be disrespectful with you LustfulAngel, but I do not share your vision at all, neither the way you have derailed from the main topic "Male Privileges" of the discussion to this new one "Extreme Feminism and Abortion", let alone other "facts" as that abortion causes breats cancer, which it has already been proven false.

I also do not like how you are talking and/or referring to the rest of the participants, which may agree or disagree with you. I am aware some of them have written in not so good ways, but that does not give you the right to do the same or something worst. However and in my humble opinion, you are not being objective anymore since you have started to attack each one of the people that have answered you, let alone the fact that you went too far away with those who are females labelling them of different things, which has nothing to do with SD or having a discussion.

To not derail too much, as I said, I do not share your viewpoint of abortion and agree with what others have already said. I agree with the statement that the feminism we always heard about are the extreme ones. However, I believe that there are still females that a part of being feminism are human beings and have common sense... a sense that you are not showing in this post, let alone respect for others opinion.

Even in the case you are completely right, I can only say, again, that I do not share your point of view, because you are not showing it as a posibility, but as an universal truth.

*******************************************

Returning to the main topic I agree with the statement that, overall, males have almost no chance of winning court cases and that some women (not all ofc), had, have been and will be getting advantage of the societies missbelieves that womens are first or better childtakers because they are "mothers" or "women".

Regarding the statement about sexual harrassment at the workplace I think it depends mainly on two key things: political companies and who your boss is (or who has the power).
- If the company is always looking for just males, females will probably have a really hard time, let alone if the one with "power" is a male that (for whatever reason) hates females or, at least, does not like them.
- The other way around is the same, but for males. They will be probably doing thins they will not want and they will have to endure it or resign.

I know this two examples are too extreme, but because of their nature I want to believe that, in general, this is no longer the case and that this types of behavior are very very rare nowadays.

So, again, I cannot still see the "Male Privilege" thing that it was stated at the beginning of the topic.