I Used To Be A Feminist

Discussion in 'Poetry Realm' started by JonathanRex, Aug 25, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    I used to be a feminist
    When I believed that they were too.
    But then I realized
    That they deny the very God
    That made them Queens
    By accepting the God
    Defined by foolish men
    And defying “him”
    test
  2. who~is~she

    who~is~she THE ORIGINAL~ILL~SISTAH

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2004
    Messages:
    234
    ooooookkaaayyy......well
    test
  3. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    Was directed at the feminist movement which is full of atheist women who all want to do what men do. There's countless feminists that claim to be a strong "independent" woman yet they chop of their hair and dress like men and gather together in groups to talk about how they can do anything a man can do.

    God did not create women to do what men do nor did God create men to do what women can do.

    That is what this poem is about. I have never heard a feminist praise the role of women in society as the "sustainers of life." And in all their "equality" rants, I've never heard a feminist talk abotu how man and woman are Yin and Yang. Instead they try to destroy our roles in society which will inevitably lead to chaos and anarchy.

    *Shrugs*
    test
  4. Red1

    Red1 A Figure of Speech

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2000
    Messages:
    1,031
    Much of the gender roles in society are social contructs.... things like long hair as you mentioned.
    While I agree there are certain things men and women can do differently from each other the list is small and biological in comparison to the percieved differences of the two genders of the human species.

    I did enjoy the piece though for the direct statement that encourages thought.
    test
  5. someone Died

    someone Died New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2006
    Messages:
    51
    I like this surprisingly, because I used to bash people on this board for short poems.. but this is exceptional.

    I think I like your style.
    test
  6. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    So what if they are social constructs? Is there anything wrong with building a society based on biological truths?

    Truth 1: Women are the 'only' one of the two sexes which can carry and give birth to a child.
    Truth 2: Men cannot carry or give birth to a child.
    Truth 3: Men became sustainers of society and formed organized societies because they could not sustain life. (Men adapted)

    Now, some men in their insecurity downplayed the role of the woman to feed their own egos as the "Head of the house" etc, etc, etc. But this is not how it was originally. Woman was treated as a Queen and the man provided her and the children which she provided him, with food, clothing, shelter, etc. If both work then both are not present to raise the child and somebody else is given that authority to teach the child things that they are not capable of teaching that child, being that they are not their maternal parents.

    Truth 4: Women therefore play the role of God in the sense that they are the sustainers of life and survival for the infant. If the mother does not provide love to the infant then when that infant becomes a man or woman they will never be capable of love. Love is a conditioned emotion in the sense that you learn to love by being loved.

    Does that mean that love should be thrown out simply because it is learned?
    This is the logic of the modern "Liberal" movement (especially that of the feminists). If it is conditioned then it should be thrown out. The problem with that is, the only thing that separates man from beast is man's ability to condition his mind and harness his powers in order to form complex societies. If we deny that then we revert back to animalism. Liberalism is utter nonsense. It is the concept of "Self Independence" and no "self" is independent in any way, shape or form.
    The Liberal denies not only God but Nature as well.


    Glad you liked it
    test
  7. Red1

    Red1 A Figure of Speech

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2000
    Messages:
    1,031

    In your reply you have managed to make my point. Your first 2 "truths" are biological differences between men and women that are true in all cases. The rest of your post was based differences that are socially constructed and not biological.
    There is nothing wrong with social contructs by their definition. It is when those social contructs become unchanging dogma that limit human development and expression in the name of the status quo do they become problems.
    If a woman wants to have short hair it is no different then a man wanting long hair. Feminist movements in my understanding are about breaking down those contructs that subordinate women and limit their opportunities in our society to pursue avenues of success traditionally thought of as masculine.
    test
  8. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    Precisely, they are trying to redefine the world.
    They are not doing this because the definitions are inadequate; they are doing this because they are too inadequate to see that it is not the definitions which are flawed, but the men who currently run the world without the ideal usage of those definitions.

    No matter how you redefine things, everything is still exactly what it is and will always be. You have just altered the labels and not the "thing" which was labeled. It is a useless chasing after the wind.

    Whether a woman has short or long hair is not the point. I currently am growing my hair to my shoulders. My wife plans on growing her hair back out really long as well. If a person wishes to cut or grow their hair, that is meaningless. It is when they try to deny their suppleness to exchange it for something that they are not that I shake my head at them.

    If a woman is built like a man (which I can think of a few who are), then they are strong. That does not detract from the fact that they are weaker than a man of the same weight and height. It is a waste of energy.

    Example: A very powerful and well developed lioness who is protecting her cubs will kill a weak male lion who threatens them. However, that same lioness will submit to the alpha male and he will provide her with everything she needs from that point forward. If the lionesses (who usually do the hunting) fail at bringing in food, then the male will go out and hunt and provide. If a pack of hyenas attack the lionesses the lionesses will fight until they cannot fight any longer and then they will retreat into trees and wait for the male. The male will returns and kill the Hyenas.

    Males are made by GOD physically stronger for a reason.
    Most women do not deny this. It is the liberal feminists who do, that are trying to speak for the rest of the women who know better.
    test
  9. Red1

    Red1 A Figure of Speech

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2000
    Messages:
    1,031

    You fail to point out that in our world physical strength as you describe in your methaphors as being able to kill a hyena is a useless trait. In our society we have built up all sorts of barriers to limit use of physical strength in daily lives. The playing field is being evened out in that regard as such differences between male and female become less meaningful.
    As our society progresses into realms that requires less of our skills as fighters/hunters/gatherers to determine our worth it would seem that the roles defined for women as their place in society would change as well.
    Strength by definition of physical ability to produce force is a limited measure of human worth or capacity to succeed in our society in most areas.
    test
  10. SAMARA

    SAMARA truth is a sword

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,151
    Being a woman is who I am not what I am.
    It is a statement of interest in fact.

    For the most part, I conclude that your interpretation is to objectify what a woman is.

    It is your own arrogance that denotes that a woman is from man.
    In fact, you deny your own creation since man is from God.
    Then, woman too is a God's image and not an image made from man.

    Either way, I am not arrogant to deny my place in creation.
    In fact, I am greatly satisfied with being the final and perfect creation.

    cheers.

    Perhaps, is it man that has the position to characterize my traits that like his must be that of man and not of being and wanting to define to him my own very existence.

    cheers.
    test
  11. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    And this progression towards Aldous Huxley's 'Brave New World' (Inevitable As It Is) will eventually lead not to John 'The Savage' committing suicide as Huxley wrote it in the first one but more in the direction of the revisited version in which he stated that John would leave the "New World" and return to the Savage World and take people with him from both, at which time they would grow into a separate division of mankind living as one with the earth learning from both the "civilized" world and returning to the spiritual aspects of the tribal world (refusing to be subjugated by the future society of Lenina and Bernard, they would ultimately become enemies of Mond and his counterparts at which a war would break out and those of the future society will be defeated fairly easily because their world is a world build upon their dependence on machines.

    Feminists are wasting their time. The world is going to move in the direction that they want it to, with or without them. They can shut up now and stop complaining. It is going to happen on its own because it is the easiest way for the elite to control the mediocre minds.

    Man and Woman are equal is essence.
    They are equal in significance.
    They are NOT equal in physical ability.
    test
  12. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    This is why I say that women should be silent when around men, Red.
    You see what happens? They spew out idiotic shit like this and think themselves clever for their incoherant babble.

    1st, off Samara - Nowhere did I say that woman comes from man. I did not display any "so called" arrogance in that matter since I did not even speak on that subject. You, my female counterpart are a fucking idiot and need to keep your mouth shut.

    2nd, Samara - Nowhere did I say that this applies to ALL women. I said it applies to Feminists. All women are not feminists. Feminism is nothing more than a political movement giving petty females the ability to bitch about anything and everything and demand change (all the while remaining so incapable of it that a man must come along and organize them, teaching them how to be equal which completely contradicts the concept that they are in fact equals).

    3rd, Samara - You are not the "final" or the "perfect" creation. That is your arrogant mind trying to display some sort of "feminine type, 'I am woman, hear me roar.' type shit" which you have not earned in the least. You're just another clueless chick on a message board. You know nothing of true strength or power. You are a barely legal young woman searching for her place in the world, afraid to ask for the truth because you want to say you found it on your own (but you never will).
    test
  13. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    It is interesting to me that the best argument for men and women being mentally equals is not coming from the women but from another man.

    Let us imagine, Red . . . that you can shut down my argument.
    You still will fail to prove your point because it will simply be one man providing a better argument than another man. You will have simply overcome me mentally. Nothing has been proven however because no woman was capable of it. Therefore, I was right from the very beginning and you ultimately have lost the argument even if you win.
    test
  14. SAMARA

    SAMARA truth is a sword

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,151
    ?

    It is my statement.

    I dont circle my thoughts around you and in most progressive discussions regurgitation is not productive.

    I disagree.

    (Is that better, asshole.)


    I could ignorantly as yourself, claim that

    A survey conducted at Yale, I think, in fact states that woman are more developed than men, but koodoos to your source of enlightenment.

    and

    The mere fact that men physically are not able to reproduce and women have the potential to evolve to being able to produce without the assistance of man-

    makes a woman phyically advanced.

    Face it- you just dont have the right equipment for evolution except in the ability to be a physical barbarion.

    and

    Hear me roar?

    what year are you living in?



    Rather, the REAL answer to your arrogance is-


    Being a feminist is not a movement -
    it is the acknowledgement of The Second Sex .

    Then you will realize that a woman does not want to be a man, but accepted for existing as man accepts the creatures of land, water and air-

    WE EXIST HERE TOO - thats what its about twit.

    TWO Separate exisitences.

    btw, whats for dinner?
    test
  15. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    [funny]


    Really, where is the sperm going to come from?

    You're a moron of a degree rarely witnessed by mankind.

    Actually, all human beings begin as females in the womb and Males "evolve" into males as the vaginal lips seal up creating the balls, the testicles drop into the sack and then the clit grows into a penis. Men are the evolution of the human race you fool.


    This is why women will never be treated equally.
    She is writing this nonsense and no women are telling her how stupid she is.

    *Shakes Head*

    You are not a feminist.
    You're a little girl trying to be tough and prove yourself in a world that you haven't even ventured out into.
    test
  16. SAMARA

    SAMARA truth is a sword

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,151
    Essentially, you have clarified your poem.
    Tks.



    The reference is made in the reply to a text of a founder of the so-called Feminist Movement, who in fact was a great lover to a renown and beloved male philosopher.

    *shakes titties*
    test
  17. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    Really?

    You don't even understand the poem.
    If you did then there wouldn't even be an exchange in the first place.

    The fact that you left out the last line very clearly demonstrates that you did not understand the point of the poem.

    There are two things that I would like to point out for your own benefit:

    1. You came in here with your already constructed biases and applied them to not what I said but to me as a man saying that I am not a feminist without asking yourself "What is his definition of a feminist?"
    2. You (like many morons before you) elect to ignore the points made and steer the conversation off it's original course in a feeble attempt to preserve your ego which is nothing more than the combination of your environment, your genetics, and your educational conditioning. You are a puppet insisting that the arm hangin out her ass is not attached to a hand that controls her.



    I wonder if that woman would have been as foolish as you have displayed yourself to be by taking offense at a poem which called women "Queens."
    Somehow I doubt it. She probably would have understood the poem for what it is saying and would have found nothing objectionable in the thread. (If her husband was in fact a well known Philosopher) [Not that this even matters, but how you know she was a great lover to him is beyond me].

    You're like a female version of Menaz.

    Oh, and stop using cliches conjured up by mediocre minds.
    Being is a woman is "what" you are, not "who" you are.
    Not the other way around. There is no "who-ness" in womanhood.
    When feminists attempt to define "woman" they are not attempting to define a "who" they are attempting to define a "what."
    test
  18. SAMARA

    SAMARA truth is a sword

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Messages:
    1,151
    No.

    You simply did not like the feedback
    and your advanced intelligence should learn with ease
    one cannot substitute the politely impolite with arrogance.
    test
  19. JonathanRex

    JonathanRex New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    Messages:
    392
    Samara - You're right, I did not like your "feedback." The reason I did not like your feedback is because you didn't even understand the poem or respond to "the poem" itself. You responded to what you "thought" I was saying about women (which I wasn't saying at all).

    That is where the problem lies.
    People are being taught knowledge non-stop but where knowledge (pseudo-knowledge) is being amplified, understanding has taken a loss.

    The problem is not with the poem or even what the poem is saying.
    The problem is that the poem is "Abstract" and your mind is "Concrete" and the images which you associated with the "Abstraction" created a cluster fuck in your head. So you came in here to express that clusterfuck. Why did you come in here and express your frustration? That has yet to be discovered by yourself and nothing I say will help you along that path of self-discovery.

    This is your first response (and it in no way was "feedback" to what I wrote):






    Now, take a break from this thread for a day or two and then come back and re-read the poem. If you would like, at that time I will explain what the poem IS saying so that you can see how you have stumbled on your journey.
    test
  20. UFO the Phoenix

    UFO the Phoenix I DONT BELIEVE IN ALIENS!

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 1999
    Messages:
    2,986
    Wheres Bhitiah when you need her?....shes always on my case but has nothing to say here?....I find that hard to believe

    This was interesting.....The short poem sparked deeper thoughts...and thats what poetry is all bout


    but lets face it, would you really want to live in a world with only one gender?....hmmm....I dont think so....male or female I dont care which side you on

    your poem seemed to touch on contradictions and the idea that when denying God...they in fact deny themselves....and perhaps ones role in society
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Users Viewing Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 0)