why do feminists deliberately forget the events on the titanic?

Discussion in 'IntroSpectrum' started by UnbrokeN, Jan 30, 2007.

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

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,568

    nope. im a man. i dont talk about shallow topics as the wimmin i see everyday. see wimmin have diffrent brains than men. they are good learners, but lack the creativity and intelligence to draw logical conclusions and develope intrest for more complex things, like playing Strategy games or discussing politcs. women are really like spoiled dumb little children.

    i dont see how running around buttnaked has anything to do with gender related social behaviour. i have no shame really...i would run around naked, i ve nothing to hide. but why put myself in jail over stupid shit? i dont do it because its pretty useless , i woudlnt gain anything from running around naked but freezng to death. but otherwise i wouldnt give a burning fuck if people saw my weiner. maybe im not a socialized person..who knows..
    test
  2. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I pretty sure Identity-x is saying society makes wearing no clothes unacceptable Therefore, people wear clothes. He is poorly pointing out how societies rules/laws are responable for our social behavior in every way shape and form. He's cleverly trying to speak with reason how in retrospective society male's preformed defacto demination over women before feminism arouse for equal rights. Thus, people like you, me, teq and other whistleblowers on Elite-feminism are the male chauvinist of our era.

    Fine by me sir, That's one equality badge i'll wear with honor.


    He knew full well you'd not understand his point he was poorly making.
    Or maybe I give people more credit than they deserve.

    Please end women suffrage. LOL

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GUJ4gojdxo&NR
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MNI3-oL4Ck&mode=related&search=
    test
  3. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    yep...

    nope



    please lay out the tenets of this "elite feminism" you speak of. try to cite mainstream feminist sources written AFTER 1990 or so. something that actually holds sway over today's feminists. something by, say, patricia hill collins or bell hooks.
    test
  4. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Lets see.

    Alpha wives are a growing issue.

    But Let me be more speific, And drop some names for you.

    Valerie Jean Solanas comes to mind.

    What the fuck at 1990? LOL! That's the most rediculous thing I've ever heard you proposition. There are feminist who still read Valerie jean solanas. Just like there are communist who still read karl marx today. The literature is still relevent.

    SCUM Manifesto reads like hitlers final solution.

    Other feminist have regarded to her text as provocative and a wake-up call and a source of reflection. WOW!

    So if your thought process as a feminist falls in line with solanas consider yourself a Elite-feminist. Alpah feminist are just as bad "thought wise" but are indeed less violent in their approach. Instead Manipulation is how they run their game.

    The book has been published off and on snice 1965. Women are still reading it. still following it. still recommending it.

    You say our sociology is responisble for all behavior. so you'd also have to agree it's responsible for the progressivism of feminism, Which has lead to elite feminist.

    I want equality. not elite-feminist.

    If you must need a 1990 referance, Andrea Dworkin.
    "Dworkin argues that in a male "supremacist" society, sex between men and women constitutes a central part of women's subordination to men. (This argument was quickly-and falsely-simplified to "all sex is rape". Dworkin's argument is obviously one-sided, disregarding benefits women may derive from these intimate connections. Nor does she spend much time on a solution for the problem of boundaries she has identified."

    Of course she doesn't. she's a Elite-feminist. Her words are truthiness. Nothing a man says can ever matter because it's a male "supremacist" society. WOW!
    test
  5. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    guess what chief...

    Valerie Solanas wrote the SCUM Manifesto 35 fucking years ago...it was first published during the HEIGHT of SECOND-WAVE feminism! just because it is republished doesn't mean the book is altered significantly, if at all

    guess what else...

    Dworkin is NOT a third-wave feminist!!! Like Solanas she's a radical feminist whose ideas fall much closer to that of the second wave...in fact, she was making the biggest stink during the descent of the second wave and rise of the third-wave. much of what she said has since been chewed up and spit out by mainstream third-wavers.


    and for god's sake re-read the fucking quote. If you had any background on Dworkin you'd understand what she really meant.

    ""Dworkin argues that in a male "supremacist" society, sex between men and women constitutes a central part of women's subordination to men."

    Nowhere does she say that "all sex is rape". Saying it constitutes a central part of women's subordination to men is saying that women who ARE subordinated by men are often done so through sex....not[I that sex causes the subordination. Her argument was that subordination of women is often carried out through the act of sex...that sex is not always enjoyed by both parties involved. THIS was why she had such a beef with pornography...she argued that it COULD be used to maintain domination of women by teaching men to be violently dominant during sex.



    NEITHER of their ideas are representative of modern feminism. Dworkin has been inonsequential for 20+ years and nobody heard a peep from Salanas from 1970 until she died in the late 80's/early 90's.



    try again...
    test
  6. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    I believe I stated those facts. Why are you regregating what I stated?

    You're guessing?

    Funny thing is her thought process translates into many books with her words which reaches the 21 century women. You act as if these books don't influence the elite-feminist of today. Remember I am against elite-feminism. I'm telling you you're comprehension is slim to none at this point with me. Honestly, Are you a dolt? Show me where I said all feminist are bad?


    This is where you're going to try an apply your Manipulation to what she means. Wrong. She is very blunt about it and unapologetic. I let the words speak for themselves.

    this is a horrible lie and spin. You are being a creationist now. Also the women and men in pornography enjoy casual sex. Yet another reason why feminist of Dworkin's nature should sit silent. People like her are like the religious right always telling people with different morals than themselves how they ought to behave. Oh, The irony.

    You need to learn more about the sex industry before you speak on it. The men and women of the sex industry see it as nothing more than a pleasureable job they are both paid for. Funny thing is the women get paid better than the men do in the sex industry plus they gain all the notoriety. further more, The women do whatever sex acts they feel comfrontable with, If she does not like anal she does not do anal. You gave the exact radical reaction I was looking for in elite-feminism. Thanks for proving me correct on elite-feminism.



    Correction They are both relevent to modern day elite-feminism.
    The literature still reaches minds and still influences those minds it doesn't die out because the author does. you big bafoon. That's like saying aristotle's logic isn't relevant to lawyers. Bafoon, I'm against elite-feminism.

    I can see you hold these two hate mongers in high regard.
    I made my point crystal clear, you're comprehension doesn't
    follow.


    catagories of Feminist still say Valerie Solanas was head of her time and her thoughts are a wake-up call and a source of reflection.You spin more than a jewish dradle during hanukkah trying protect this elite-feminism.

    Don't ask someone what they think if you're not open minded to the answer.Try being a revisionist feminist instead of an orthodox feminist.
    test
  7. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    because i asked you to find an instance of contemporary, third-wave feminist writing where the author extols the ideas associated with this "elite feminism" you keep speaking of

    you posted the work of an author who wrote a book 35+ fucking years ago and noted that it was "republished" in the 90's as if it meant DICK

    FEW people take her more radical idea seriously menaz. Her more tame (less "elitist") ideas might somewhat but even those, as magnificently demonstrated by you, are twisted and taken out of context. this is common with MUCH feminist thought as anti-feminists try to paint a picture of feminism that doesn't (or no longer) exist.

    nowhee did you say all feminists are bad...i never claimed you did. You can throw out your critiques of "elite-feminism" all you want. I'm not one to stop you and, in fact, myself and other third-wave feminists agree with much of your critiques.

    the point i'm making is that this "elite-feminism" you keep critiquing does not exist to the extent you believe it does and is no longer relevant to most feminist thought. You're going all out to fight a demon that has been slayed, thrown in a coffin, and buried 6ft deep by OTHER feminists.

    they DO speak for themselves! [funny]

    sure dude...I'm the dolt?.?.?

    from wikipedia:

    "In works such as Woman Hating and Pornography: Men Possessing Women, Dworkin had argued that pornography and erotic literature in patriarchal societies consistently eroticized women's sexual subordination to men, and often overt acts of exploitation or violence. In Intercourse, she went on to argue that that sort of sexual subordination was central to men's and women's experiences of sexual intercourse in a male supremacist society, and reinforced throughout mainstream culture, including not only pornography but also in classic works of male literature."

    she's talking about a particular type of sexual practice. she argues it's a TOOL of sexist subordination, not subordination in and of itself.

    She argued that this kind of depiction enforced a male-centric and coercive view of sexuality, and that, when the cultural attitudes combine with the material conditions of women's lives in a sexist society, the experience of heterosexual intercourse itself becomes a central part of men's subordination of women, experienced as a form of "occupation" (cf. Chapter 7, "Occupation/Collaboration") that is nevertheless expected to be pleasurable for women and to define their very status as women.

    oh look...a FUCKING CONTEXT for her comments, one which you decided to leave out completely.

    she's talking about "women" as a collective in a sexist society. this doesn't apply to all women. this doesn't apply to all sex.

    it's like when a person claims America is a racist country (and it is...) that doesn't mean all americans living within it are recist

    THIS IS MY FUCKING POINT!

    You DO know that MANY early and current third-wave feminists argued that pornography and stripping are EMPOWERING. That's still the case today (though it has been tweaked and these arguments are now made with a specific understanding that it can be BOTH empowering and degrading.)

    NOW you're getting it. THAT is what separates the likes of Dworkin with more contemporary feminist thought. it's not a matter of "elite-feminism" verses feminism.

    it's a matter of old-school feminist thought that nobody fucking cares about any more and modern day feminist thought

    and I myself am, by no means, anti-porn. I know the context within which it exists. I know that it is aimed primarily at male audiences, many of whom see women as nothing more than fuck dolls. I know there's a percentage of it that is violent.

    But I, like many contemporary feminists, also see how it can be empowering for those involved and enjoyable or helpful to those who view it.

    more from Wikipedia:

    Among the major events that marked the time known as second wave feminism, were:

    The Feminist Sex Wars of the late 1970s and 1980s between anti-pornography feminism and sex-positive feminism. The "Sex Wars" led to deep divisions within the feminist movement and also laid the groundwork for many issues that were important in third-wave feminism.

    when judged by today's standards, I think YOU are a bigger feminist than you give yourself credit

    you take the good, you toss aside the bad. THAT's called progress, and that's exactly what contemporary feminists have done with the works of these two and other second- or first-wave femists

    i think that, while many of their ideas are misconstrued, most of them are outdated, regressive, and damaging to male-female relationships
    test
  8. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    LOL@ how unnecessary this reply of yours is.

    I gave you two cases. You asked for one in the 1990's I gave you Dworkin.
    regraudless of that insane request Both authors works are as relevant today as they were back then. You're not making sense. I've given you anaology after anaology of how wrong you are. You can't be reasoned with.

    Still makes nonsense to regurgating something I was open and honest with from the get-go. WOW!


    Nothing was twisted or taken out of contents. You're just being a wikipedia goof Who is not getting his facts straight. This is common among dolts I argue with on here. How you gonna pull wikipedia when even you know it's not reliable? I'm not gonna listen to wikipedia truthiness. She's a elite feminist. Again you seem to be having a comprehension problem. I'm worried about those people who do take her every word as gospel.

    Goddam, Now I have to get you the name of the book, Just so you can order it and read it and know what the fuck I'm taking about. Goddam, You're a waste of time. book is called: Intercourse. She talks about how a women can't fight the power if she is sharing her bed with a man. Her books are top sellers by the way.





    That is a bold face lie, When books like Dworkins and other radical feminist
    are best sellers still. The thought process is being keept very much alive.
    This beast is very much alive and conforming to these elitist mindsets.


    You're arguing something completely different. You're propositioning the argument. Going to wikipedia was you're mistake. LOL!
    test
  9. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    This is what I'm talking about, Radical views like this one elite-feminist like her try to clearify as if it's truth (and dolts like you blindly justify it). Pornography is not a tool of sexist subordination. (NO HOMO) There are Playgirls as well as playboys. You are blindly following someone elses doltish thoughts ( That's how elite-feminism works).

    Wrong context. Wrong book. Her arguments like are always one sided with out a foot to stand on.

    That doesn't apply at all it's a double edge sword. And stop trying to twist everything into something it's not. You're not even in her right book for crying out loud.

    Here She's acting like Pornography is responseble for male sexist thought inside marriages inwhich women subordinate to sex as the occupation. She's blaming Pornography for this. That is rediculous if anything pornography helps your sex life. that's a pretty GIANT FUCKING leap if you consider material sex has always been mandatory for both partners in a marriage long before PORNOGRAPHY came around. What a elite-feminist she is. And you're no better, trying to porrly defend this crap.


    Again, You take the Womans side without mentioning that MEN are subjected to a sexist society as well. You're mind doesn't go two ways and that is my point about elite-feminism. They have one set ideaology they lie continuously for.




    There is nothing degrading about Pronography. It's a womens choice. These elite-feminist who regard to it as degrading don't know the first thing about these girls. Alot of them have feitish that require being degraded. I'm talking girls with
    4.0 and a masters degree who love being pissed on. They get off on it, they enjoy it, Something a uptight elite-feminist knows nothing about. I'll take a thrid-waver out quick and in a hurry if they step over the equality boundary.

    correction, I've always got it. But you aren't comprehending what I'm saying. I'm saying Dworkins work continues to influence the modern elite-feminist thought. Do you get my point yet?

    People do care about it. The books would not continue to be best sellers if they didn't care about it. The thought is still every much alive as it ever was. I witness it dayly. Where do you think I found out about Dworkin the elite-FEMINIST? For another elite-feminist who follows her words. You can't just dismiss it, NEO-Nazi's were said to be down and out in 2000, now in 2007 they are strong again.


    Then stop agruing it. it's not completely true about pornstars being fuck dolls. That is male fantasy, not the male reality. Just like Lexington steel is womens fuck doll. It's women fantasy, not women reality. Again I don't see TWO sides of think from you. I see a bitter ideology with one speed. Just so you know MEN are beat up by women in that violent porn. But the rationale is feitsh and fantasy. The viewer knows this. It's freedom of expression. As a man you should know how to seperate the reality and fantasy. After the Jerk is complete women become real again. same with women thought, after they climax, reality sets back in. If anything sex is a aniaml instinct with us all.

    But
    I find it weird that a ideology has to help you reach those conclusions. But whatever floats your boat. atleast your on my same page now.


    I was never refering to Pornography. Dworkin's book was published around 1990. I was refering to dworkin's book, Intercourse. Which is on The act itself not with Pornography included.

    I'm not a feminist in any way shape or form. My revolution hasn't been defined yet. Because I have not defined it. The ideology I follow will not be that of anothers it will be my own. If it happens to correlate with feminism that repersent equailty as the status-quo than that is just a coincidence.

    I have human interaction, Those feminist ideologies aren't surpressed in modern times.
    test
  10. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    It CAN be a tool. Audience interpretation of ANY mass-mediated object comes into play here and there is a very real possibility that some men watching violent porn (whether the stars involved enjoy it or not) might carry over these practices into the bedroom. Almost fifty years of media studies makes that abundantly clear.

    That said...I, personally, don't see a problem with videotaped, non-violent sex between two consenting adults.

    Neither do most contemporary feminists.

    Neither do you.

    We're all in the same boat on this one

    You seem to know a good bit about Marx right?

    You can't simply read Das Kapital or The German Ideology and claim "this is, definitely, what Marx had to say on the subject". You examine the breadth of his work when examining his claim.

    Same goes for Dworkin.

    Regardless, I (like most contemporary feminists....and like you...we're in the same boat on this one) disagree with her views on pornography.

    there's no twisting. I like to call it reading comprehension

    I'm not defending this.

    I disagree fundamentally.

    Most contemporary feminists disagree in one regard or another (or completely).

    You disagree.

    We are all in the same boat on this one.

    not all pornography is equal. it can be degrading, and it's also a matter of interpretation. When a guy watches a (willing!) woman get pissed on in porn and, as a result, demands his wife do the same thing, THEN it become a problem

    That said...

    I agree with much of what you have to say.

    Most contemporary feminists agree with what you have to say

    We are in the same boat on this one.

    and I'm saying it DOESN'T influence the ideas OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of contemporary feminists in any meaningful way.

    surely it will have an influence on a handful of people today who self-identify as "feminists" and hold on to the ideas that stopped mattering in the larger scheme of things some 25 years ago. BUT...they are not representative of current feminist movement.

    best seller??? [funny]

    Dworkin sits on shelves getting dusty while bell hooks and Patricia Hill-Collins are assigned in classes in every department from sociology to women's studies to english to literature to media studies and communications.

    PLEASE point out where I said I WAS anti-feminist. All I said was that it CAN have negative effects.

    So does TV sitcom watching. I'm not anti-television.

    So does eating ice-cream. i'm not anti-ice-cream

    You can assume the viewer knows this - you do...I do...most do - but a small proportion do not.

    My recognition of this is evidence that I DO see two sides of the story. Your steadfast adherence to ONE side of the story makes you no better than the elite-feminists you hate.

    I was pro-porn years before I even picked up a piece of literature. Not that there would be any harm in someong seeing pornography in a different light because of something a contemporary feminist wrote about it....but that ain't me.

    it was written in 1987...during the fall of the second wave and a good 5+ years before third-wave feminism got a foothold. hell it was 5 years before the term "third-wave" was even used.

    it is on the act within a particular social context, and speaks to sex for women as a collective and not individual experiences.

    you sure do have a lot of ideas shared with most contemporary feminists.

    i think you're in denial ;)
    test
  11. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,568
    the point is, all feminism is bad. third wave feminism is only masking the problem. true feminism would be the following: i am a woman. i am a loving wife. i love children, and want many of them, and i favor children and marriage over a high profile career, since that is my mans job. i need to use my womanly strenghts and features, to contribute to this society.

    feminism indirectly advocates childlessness, since feminists see children as burdens and not as blessings, hindering women to have a successfull career. thats why the majority of women under 30 in europe dont have children anymore...and the social backlash of that will be so enormous, and its already being felt.
    test
  12. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    First off the media lies. The issue is not just men watch these kinds of porn movies. Though Special civil interest groups like ACLU would like you to believe that because it furthers whatever agenda they have at the moment. See I have no problem with any kind of porn whether it be bondage, viloent-fethishes, or
    you're best friends mom sucking you off. Mordern feminist as you just pointed
    out have a problem with it unlike me. It's more of a freedom of expression issue
    for me that feminist ideology doesn't dictate for me. If it's too hardcore simplely don't watch it, end of story.

    You seem to know a good bit about Marx right?

    Hitler's Ideology was fascism read mein kampf. it's exteremist like hitler witch lead to onesided ideologies that act in the name of a STRUGGLE. And Marx was a tottally different writter from dworkin, marx had a economical and equality mindset, dworkin's has one speed Anti-male rethoric to in power women over men sort of like how Hitler blamed jews for all germany's problems in mein kampf. The problem with contemporary feminists such as yourself, You seem to talk out of both sides of your mouth, you don't tottally disagree with her.



    I would love for us to all be in the same boat, But you have to tottally denounce dworkin's first as a rambling mad-women who's ideology is tottally inaccurate.



    It's not just MEN. It's women also.

    Most males are so pussy whipped they'd never demand their wife to do it. especially if the wife is a MOTHER. Every couple has fetishes. You're speaking hypothetically anyway. In most cases the Male or females already have these fetishes. Hence, Why they are watching piss videos. This is a free country people are allowed to ask if they can piss on one another if they want. You have it in your mind adults are like children that reinact everything they see. Most Males and females would be too imbarassed to tell one another they like being pissed on or pissing on another person. We live in a soceity full of shame.

    I would like that to be true. Agreeing is a good process.
    test
  13. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    The ones it does influence, Let me worry about. And I wouldn't say none of it influnces you're form of feminism because I haven't seen you totally denounce dworkin's completely.

    Yeah and White supremists don't follow hitlers ideology in mein kampf.




    You can't dismiss dworkin's as a best seller.

    She is co-author of the pioneering Minneapolis and Indianapolis ordinances that define pornography a civil-rights violation against women. She has testified before the Attorney General's Commission on Pornography and a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee. She has appeared on national television shows including MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour, 60 Minutes, CBS Evening News, and 48 hours. She has been a focus of articles in The New York Times, Newsweek, The New Republic, and Time. And an hour-long documentary called Against Pornography: The Feminism of Andrea Dworkin, produced by the BBC, was watched by more viewers in England than any other program in the Omnibus series and has been syndicated throughout Europe and Australia.

    The author of 13 books of fiction, nonfiction, and poetry, Dworkin is a political artist of unparalleled achievement.

    In every century, there are a handful of writers who help the human race to evolve," said Gloria Steinem; Andrea is one of them." Dworkin's first
    novel, Ice and Fire, was published in 1986; Mercy followed in 1990 to wide
    acclaim in the U.S. and abroad- "lyrical and passionate," said The New York Times; "one of the great postwar novels," said London's Sunday Telegraph; "a fantastically powerful book," said the Glasgow Herald. Her latest nonfiction book is Life and Death: Unapologetic Writings on the Continuing War Against Women.

    She is not that easy to dismiss.


    I think my point was you're not totally anti-elite-feminism.
    The term if they are dumb leave them dumb comes to mind.
    cussing while children are around is subjective, but you can't fight everything.

    I don't see Two sides in your thought process. Until I see it, I can't trust you.



    Well good. Then why argue it



    No, I recognize to be a feminist. I must accept everything in mordern feminist ideology but I don't. You're recurting methood sounds like a homosexual trying to convert a striaght guy just because the striaght guy is for gay marriage.
    test
  14. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    who are YOU, an anti-feminist to define its principles?

    not a requirement for being a feminist

    being a wife isnt' a requirement for being a feminist, but if you are a wife then being loving to someone who loves and respects you DOES fall in line with being a feminist

    having children isnt' a requirement for being a feminist, but if you do have children then loving them with your entire being DOES fall in line with being a feminist

    "...or none of them. I should have the power to choose how I want my body used"

    because favoring both and contributing to a strong through my actions in both is impossible....riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight ;)

    humanly strenghts

    i'll extend the same challenge to you that I did to menaz. find me a single piece of feminist literature written by a contemporary, third-wave writer (in the past 15 years) that advocates this in any way shape or for
    test
  15. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    of course it does. i was talking about media studies, a research field wherein researchers recognizes the extent of this better than the two of us combined

    i have no problem with two consenting adults starring in such films.
    i have no problem with adults paying to view such films
    however, i understand that viewing these films can effect people in different ways.

    This is the line of thinking supported by most contemporary feminists. At the very least, we are all in the same boat on the first two statements.

    no...i did NOT point out that modern feminists have a problem with porn, per se.

    second-wave feminists? yeah...most of them anyway.

    but this line of thinking is simply not shared by the majority of third-wave feminists.

    there's a difference between having a problem with porn (which contemporary feminists do not) and recognizing that some porn can cause problems (which anyone with a brain does) - desensitization, acceptance of sexual roles that the viewer might try to impose on their partner (because they "saw it in a movie"), etc.

    i'm not sure if any of that is relevant to...uh...anything

    i totally disagree with her claim that "all pornography is bad"

    I do understand that pornography can lead to social problems.

    it's not a black or white issue

    dworkin isn't even on the same planet as I am. she's inconsequential. she doesn't matter. she hasn't mattered for a long time

    i'm talking about YOU, ME, and CONTEMPORARY feminists....the first two denounce the bulk of dworkin's claim and the last who reactionarily denounces the whole of her claims simple beause he doesn't agree with one part of it.

    we might not be in the same fishing boat, but we're at least on opposite ends of the same ocean liner

    it didn't say that was only men into these things. i merely provided an example.

    i agree with what you say. most contemporary feminists would agree with much of what you're saying too. there is no agreement here.

    (for the record...i recognize that all receivers of media message have agency in terms of how they interpret, come to understand, and respond to the messages they see)

    i said it doesn't influence the majority in any meaningful way.

    like i said..."you take the good, you toss aside the bad. THAT's called progress, and that's exactly what contemporary feminists have done with the works of these two and other second- or first-wave femistst"

    the second-wave's influence on contemporary feminist thought has come through learning what NOT to think and what NOT to do. the rise of the third wave came in response to all of the failures in both thought and practice of the second-wave. that doesn't mean they didn't contribute anything, but we've certainly moved on.

    i would never denounce neo-conservative approaches to governing, because I see the value in a number of their ideas (though I'm less likely to see value in a number of their practices...this is all for another thread). i'm influenced by their approach, but i'd hardly call myself a neo-con
    test
  16. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    yeah...in 19-fucking-87

    the bulk of her work was published between 1975 and 1990...during the peak and then descent of the second wave

    again..."third-wave" feminist thought began to emerge in the mid 80's and wasn't even given that title until like 1992.

    The second-wave was fizzling out before Dworkin even became any sort of force in feminist movement. She was saying the same things that other second-wave feminists had been saying for 30 years and only the old guard was buying it.

    She does NOT have any sort of great influence on CONTEMPORARY feminist thought. just because she wrote a few books 25 years ago doesn't mean she's influential in the present day. it's not like she's written 15+ books since the year 2000 - like bell hooks. THAT's influential. Dworkin is not.

    1. not all porn is bad
    2. porn can be bad

    got it?

    i never did argue it. show me where i did

    there isn't a single contemporary feminist whose ideas mirror another contemporary feminist, even if they share a bulk of ideas with a bulk of other individuals who self identify as contemporary feminists.

    feminists have provided some of the biggestc criticism of feminism...THAT'S why there was such a huge shift in approach 15-20 years ago.


    the point remains...your thoughts on pornography are similar to that of many contemporary feminists.

    and in case you missed it...Andrea Dworkin is not considered by anyone but you to be a contemporary feminist
    test
  17. UnbrokeN

    UnbrokeN Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2001
    Messages:
    22,568

    how many academic women have children? there you go..as far as im concerned, only 40 % do have children, and many of them only one. the point is, even tho your kind of feminism isnt advocating it, women are practicing it. make the survey yourself..ask young women our age who go to college or university if they plan on starting a family anytime soon :)...

    ''equality'' leads to gender confusion, many young women dont want to be nurturers and wifes anymore because society indoctrinates them they can as successful as males ..and men dont want to take responsibility anymore, because they see themselves in a situation where they can only lose..

    you can deny it as much as you like, but 'equality' leads to a gender conflict and rivalry..not harmony..harmony is when you have two diffrent poles playing in each others hands and needs, fulfilling the whole..this new society that people like you created for capitalistic and individualistic gains is bound to collapse in itself one day.

    its a vicious cycle, spwaned by feminist idealogy that both sexes should be treated fully equal on all of societies spectrums.
    test
  18. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    Those research groups, Twist facts. That is common knowledge.
    Infact the lead scientist just got fired from his head position because
    He would not agree Global warming was 100% man-made.

    That is how these speical interest groups work.

    Got it?



    As long as you understand It effects Men and women. And I don't believe Porn
    effects them in such a matter they want to dominate one another. However, I
    do believe it effects them by giving them sexual guidance, sexual awareness.

    I would say Children aren't equipped to handle porn, But adult females and males
    can sperate what is reasonable from what is unreasonable. You are so agreeing with dworkin' When you speak like this. You sound just like a elite-feminist. You are looking shady when you DO NOT state MALE AND FEMALE. it's like you're implying MALES ONLY. Do you think you're a Bar tender after watching cocktail?



    It's very relevant. you use her Line of thinking to still try and point Dominates porn causes. I'm telling you it's bullshit. If anything, Sexual tips on how to better
    please the Woman or man is being Subjected. I'm sure if either consenting
    adult had a issue with one anothers NEW SEXUAL ADVANCE they would simplely
    say like a grown up that doesn't work for me sexually. Got it, buddy?

    I watch some sick shit in porn. Yet I never suggest it in bed. I have a slew of friends who are the same way. It's fantasy not reality. Adults can seperate
    the two.



    I don't agree with anything she says. The women who follow her bullshit to the T are complete male haters.

    Yeah if only you would denounce this lady entirely maybe I could take you seriously as a thrid-waver.



    Yeah using men not women.
    Nothing worse I hate then politicing.

    It's not just MEN. it's WOMEN too.

    accept it.

    We shouldn't be arguing at all. Just denounce dworkin's.

    However, You must listen to me. I don't feel you are on the same page as I am.
    I feel you still believe Second wave feminist like dworkin's while not entirely right are right on somethings. I can't agree with that mind state. that's like saying not everything hitler did was bad because he was doing it foir germany.

    That would be partially true in your case. However that sentiment is not generally the norm.
    test
  19. menaz

    menaz Avant Garde

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Messages:
    16,807
    We're talking one of the most controverstal women figures of the 21st century. And her books continue to sell good even to this day. You can't deny women aren't buying and reading her work still in large proportions. Why you argue this is fucking rediculous and insults my intelligence. People still read mein kampf too. Neo-nazi's are still a problem. Stop it.


    iHer work is still relevant to feminist. You even ridiculously asked for a 1990 feminist so I gave you one. You can't just dismiss her work because of your thrid-wave feminist thoughts. Not every feminist is in the thrid-wave is like you. Alot have been influenced by the second wave and agree with there sentiments. I've witnessed the fan base first hand. I don't consider all christians evangelical followers, But there is a portion say Jesus is God. Understand?

    Funny thing is you asked for a 1990 reference. LOL!
    Don't change the argument. regardless, She wrote books up
    until 2001-2002 before dying in 2005. Which I believe was called The Political Memoir of a Feminist.

    Bullshit, She was a huge force in the feminist movement as I already provided. And her work still is.

    WOW! At that statement.

    That's like saying Edgar allen poe has no influence on poets today.
    Jesus christ, Dude. Get a grip. I'm not signling EVERY MODERN FEMINIST OUT. But it does influence modern day feminist. She wrote books up untill 2001.


    bad for children eyes, I would agree.

    They supply a even bigger criticism for men. And that is the issue here I have about elite-feminist. feminist don't disagree with one another in general matters. If anything they agree with somethings the second wave states.

    Not really, because I don't think the effects are life threating like you do.
    Nor do I think dominance in bed lies sololy with the male. I think it can lie with Females and males. furthermore, I don't think PORN is the culprit. Because this behavior has switched gender roles thoughout history before porns existance.



    This is my biggest problem with you. You don't listen to reason. I'm not saying anything about her except that her work influences the feminist of today.To say that is untrue is like saying 1990 special forces manuals didn't help train terrorist for 2001 & 2003. besides she wrote books until 2001 anyway.
    test
  20. identity-X

    identity-X No Talent Assclown

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 1999
    Messages:
    14,025
    i can't argue with that. point is, you said ADVOCATE, which is very different than PRACTICE.

    feminism advocates (yes advocate...not simply practice) nurturing and loving, as long it isn't demanded of them by a person's partner

    success doesn't have to come at the expense of nurturing and vice versa

    the practice of gender subordination leads to gender conflict as parties involved realize they are being subordinated. no human wants to be subordinated and it makes sense that they would respond accordingly

    and my bet is that I'm as anti-individualistic as anyone on this site.

    equal consideration still isn't the same as being "treated equal" or "equal outcome"

    you're beating a dead horse.
    test
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

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