My Theory About Why Feminism is Currently Irrelevent to Millenials

[loramin]

Originally Posted by fash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But, do you think they raised legitimate points?

"White supremacy will be strengthened, not weakened, by women’s suffrage."
"The enfranchisement of women would insure immediate and durable white supremacy"

History seems to have proven both of those wrong, as I'm pretty sure white supremacy as a belief has declined since then. No legit points there.


"Alien illiterates rule our cities today; the saloon is their palace, and the toddy stick, their scepter. The colored race multiplies like the locusts of Egypt."

The context of that quote was that she had just come back from the South and was bitter that her temperance (no booze) campaign had failed, so she was blaming black people. Hard for me to have any sympathy for someone like that. She probably has a legit point about "illiterates" though. After all it's to be expected that a people only a few generations removed from slavery (when literacy was punishable by death), and who were still heavily repressed, might not have the best reading skills.


"What will we and our daughters suffer if these degraded black men are allowed to have the rights that would make them even worse than our Saxon fathers?"

Flat out racist; everyone deserves rights, even if that's somehow inconvenient for Elizabeth Cady Stanton. But you have to keep people's context in consideration before judging them, and she was from a different time so ... /shrug I'm not judging her, I just don't think she has a legit point.


"The white men, reinforced by the educated white women, could ‘snow under’ the negro vote in every state, and the white race would maintain its supremacy without corrupting or intimidating the negroes."

Yeah, white people had lots of options for disenfranchising black people (aka Jim Crow), and they continued to do so up until the civil right movement (and after too, to a lesser extent). Saying white people had ways to screw over black people during that era is plain and simple history, ie. definitely a legit point.

[JurisDictum]

This article describes a little bit of what I've been on about:

The movement to stop sexual harassment in the workplace will eventually move past this moment of shocking allegations against famous men, and should soon focus on the many nonfamous people in quotidian circumstances. But top news organizations are not likely to provide as much due diligence about those cases. No doubt many disputes will more resemble those on campus, in that the charges will be about ambiguous situations for which there is little evidence. This amazing moment has a chance to be truly transformative. But it could also go off track if all accusations are taken on faith, if due process is seen as an impediment rather than a requirement and an underpinning of justice, and if men and women grow wary of each other in the workplace. As Laura Kipnis, a feminist professor at Northwestern, writes in her book, Unwanted Advances, “I can think of no better way to subjugate women than to convince us that assault is around every corner.”

The author (Emily Yoffe) is focused on due process given to non-famous men...

She as an older elite woman herself can't completely see how different it is for millennial middle class and working class men. But she does much better than I expected. Most rich white feminists, expect there to be plenty of working class and middle class men playing power games with female co-workers and inferiors.

It doesn't occur to them that Millennial men simply aren't as arrogant and backward as people like Bill O'Reilly. They have seen and experienced sexism. They see sexist bosses getting away with shit... So the assumption is that's how the entire country is structured.

But the lower orders are frankly -- a lot more feminist. Especially the younger generation. We don't the luxury of smacking some girls ass and risking ruining our life. That's only something older rich guys get arrogant enough to do. And BTW -- they do this because they know it's wrong. That's what makes it exciting for them. It's not like we all need a big education in what's is and isn't appropriate behavior. They just need a kick in the balls and the rest of society can move on.

I don't know if Obama can take credit for this shift. But the author gives Obama a lot of credit (indirectly) for making the younger generation less sexist. She also claims he is partially responsible for the negative side effects of kangaroo courts in college, and rape hysteria.

[stormlord]

Originally Posted by mickmoranis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But when crime is disproportionately perpetrated by black people, and black criminals dress exactly the same as black people, aka as a thug, and police have been using profiling to both protect themselves and us, as the central ability for them to investigate and stop crime for the last 100 years, what do you expect to happen?

Hear me out... I know your teeth are grinding at the perceived racism above.... It's not though.

The left has this ability to be like, "well I think racism is real so cops must only operate because of institutional racism"

No, they operate the way they do around black people, because of STATISTICS, and they use those statistics to police. Then someone finds out that they do that, and they think its institutional racism.

The number of institutional racism vs regular profiling is drastically less than. its just modern libs cant tell the difference and think what they read on buzzfeed is the truth.

If you think the science behind profiling is wrong, then watch Mindhunter on netflix and you'll see its how we use it to prevent murder very often.



They are treated worse in most contries that accept them, because they are immigrants and that right off the bat in racist europe is a mark against you, and also they are entitled and create nasty crime, which gives them a bad reputation, and oh what happens? The above, the police profile them, people missinterperate that to institutional racism, they cry that its not fair, they give up trying, because, WHY try when the institution is against you!

The spiral continues. Crime goes up, riots happen, more profiling, less hope yadda yadda etc etc.



There are solutions besides demanding some sort of change in the way other people operate.. like idk, stop acting like a victim and start taking responsibility for your own actions? The black community in america suffers from this very thing. They feel like there is no point in trying, because WE tell them the system is rigged against them. Why would you try when the whole system is rigged against you?!

Then what happens when a black person works on them self? THEY EXCEL they do wonderful, they fit RIGHT into society...

WHY?

Because america is NOT a racist country. The system isn't rigged against them. They are free and equal just like anyone else. That's why.

But they're conditioned to think they are second class citizens, by even the very minority groups that are trying to help them. The minority activist groups say that they're being screwed, so agian, why try?! Not until I get what I deserve!



Exactly like I said above, by telling a group of people that they are being screwed, when they are not, you discourage them actually working towards the goal that they hope to achieve, independence. You make them dependent on other people. The black communities in america, suffered GREATLY from this (not saying they didnt from a whole bunch of fucked up shit pre civil rights movement/slavery) and they suffer from it every day today.

When you tell someone they dont have a shot, they dont try to take one.



This is a myth, myths like this create animosity between two groups that up until then were getting along. That is harmful to the end goal of equality.




We have, the civil rights movement got us there. But our generation has had such a failed educational system, that nobody today KNOWS that this happened. They now wander around reading headlines from buzzfeed and huff po and NYT and CNN and think that whatever they read in that poorly written op-ed is true.

They get mad, they fight, they create animosity, they shoot themselves in the foot.

Why? So some media corporations can make profits off advertising. Its sick.



The thing is you have people going, "look at these immigrants, they come to this country, they have no money, they work super hard doing 3 low paying job, just to make ends meet." But what theyre not telling you is theyre living in fucking CALIFORNIA and they have a hosue with like 17 fucking people in it, half of them are kids (aka dreamers) that they have to provide for and on top of that, they SEND MONEY HOME...

OF COURSE you cant get ahead when you have that many dependents lol, but then to say its the system, its institutional racism, its rigged, to say that THAT is the reason? That is just sad, and it enables their bad behavior.

If you want to get ahead in america, you have to work hard of course, but you have to work SMART as well.

Telling people that the system is rigged against them, or that there is institutional racism holding them back, or that men are going to cheat them out of their hard work, doesn't help. It enables the ability for the gap (that we solved with the civil rights movement and woman's rights movement in the 60's and 70's) to grow and grow.

You dont ahve to agree, but lor, i feel like you might be able to at least understand why the cause's on the left are not worth fighting for.

They exist because of boredom because we live in a good society that allowed for our generation to forget their history and want some drama in an otherwise working and unexciting political climate.

They exist to elect politicians and to make the corporations cash so they can dump money onto those same politicians to get rid of things like net neutrality or allow them to build a housing development.

They exist simply, because Americans are dumb.

I think racism and patriarchal abuses were real pre-civil rights movement, but lately I been questioning its severity. How much of this is people being convinced it's a problem BECAUSE THEY'RE TOLD. Or because it's a scapegoat to all their perceived problems? For example, feminism roared to life in the 20th century. Early on, woman couldn't vote for president. When this country was founded, woman couldn't even own property. They were rarely educated beyond grade school. Mom's would tell their daughters to learn homemaking and find a husband. Family farms were very common in those days, meaning people were more focused at home than at careers. This meant daughters who failed to find husbands would still work with the family farm. It was common for daughter to learn how to use a gun because the boys or father weren't always home. Numbers of marriages were high and divorce rate was relatively low compared to modern times. Free education through highschool for both genders became common early to mid 20th century. So by the time woman were educated and being independent was more possible for everyone, it's only 1+1=2 woman would want equality! So really if you're a woman before all these thigns came about, why should you care about it when it's like caring about the price of tea in China?

I'm saying racism and womans rights issues ARE real. I'm not denying that. What I'm getting at is the world in those days wasn't the same as it's now. Priorities were different because what was expected of you was different. When those things changed, it only makes sense woman's rights would become like a tidal wave.

My view changed when I started reading stories about family life in the 19th century. There were woman learning all varieties of skills. It's not like men were beating up woman all day and woman were always victims. Woman weren't just "barefoot and pregnant" either. Not if these're self-respecting people. Picking out the worst of the people is not representative or fair, but it seems common to do these days when discussing the past. I believe people do that now because this world is different and they can't understand the older world. Yes, the modern world is different BECAUSE THERE'S LESS ABUSE OR PREJUDICE, but don't let that exclude anything else that might make them different. This is the flaw in modern perspective. The revulsion to the old world is like an open sore and it prevents objective discussion.

Some people will dismiss me as racist/sexist enabling, but I think this discussion is similar to modern EQ and classic EQ arguments. Most players agree modern EQ is better, but some still prefer the older. I know racism and ignorance and sexism and bigotry existed in the past, but that's not the only thing I see in the past. It's just like modern players who ONLY see grind, corpse runs, no maps, waiting lists, meditation spellbook and other in classic EQ. They--for whatever reason--cannot see past those things. They can't see the whole system. This means they can never fully understand how the old world worked. It will just baffle and disgust them into perpetuity.

That's how I feel. We're rewriting history IMHO by only looking at the bad. It's like condemning a person on a fault rather than judging all of the positives they might have. It's might be the appropriate thing to do morally, but objectively we should be careful we don't condemn eveyr person on Earth.

[mickmoranis]

Originally Posted by stormlord [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I know racism and ignorance and sexism and bigotry existed in the past, but that's not the only thing I see in the past.

most modern libtards think that everything that makes up the past was just pure lynch mob racism. Like if you say, boy id like to live in the 50's theyre like OH YOU WANT TO KILL BLACK PEOPLE?

its like jesus christ, maybe the problem is YOU not me? ya know?

I mean they actually think that by reminding everyone about columbus on columbus day (and making it a non payed holiday) is some how going to solve racisim?

Like people were racist because of columbus?

Its so sad, the left just cant let their depression not control their entire lives.

Meanwhile, if a child has a parent the left disagrees with, they think its fine to bully them, even though 24 hours eariler they were crying about how sad it was that that same kid was bullied.

yeah, sure, ill listen to the fickle mob tell me Im wrong about the state of equality in america, surrrereeee Ill listen to em [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Kaight]

Originally Posted by mickmoranis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I mean they actually think that by reminding everyone about columbus on columbus day (and making it a non payed holiday) is some how going to solve racisim?

Like people were racist because of columbus?

...

Meanwhile, if a child has a parent the left disagrees with, they think its fine to bully them, even though 24 hours eariler they were crying about how sad it was that that same kid was bullied.

No, we don't. We, us lefty libtards, think that it's not right to be celebrating this happy myth of ~~Columbus Sailing the Ocean Blue in 1492!~~ when he exploited and enslaved indigenous people and was just all-around a piece of shit. Why not use this day to celebrate the people that were actually here first? Are you really that big of a Columbus fan that this deeply offends you? You can remain true to your conservative values while conceding that maybe celebrating an asshole isn't cool. You'd still get your "payed" day off.

We, the modern libtards, do not think it's okay to bully, even if the kid was using the n-word and the bullies were trying to get him to stop. It's especially not okay because that poor kid was indoctrinated by his racist mother, who tried to take advantage of his tears and exploit him for money.

[jakerees]

Originally Posted by Kaight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

No, we don't. We, us lefty libtards, think that it's not right to be celebrating this happy myth of ~~Columbus Sailing the Ocean Blue in 1492!~~

It's a myth that Columbus sailed across the Atlantic in 1492? Cool, I learn all kinds of stuff here

Originally Posted by Kaight [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why not use this day to celebrate the people that were actually here first?

Isn't November (the whole month) Native American Heritage Month? And the purpose of this month is "a time to celebrate rich and diverse cultures, traditions, and histories and to acknowledge the important contributions of Native people."

[Kaight]

Originally Posted by jakerees [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's a myth that Columbus sailed across the Atlantic in 1492? Cool, I learn all kinds of stuff here

Isn't November (the whole month) Native American Heritage Month? And the purpose of this month is "a time to celebrate rich and diverse cultures, traditions, and histories and to acknowledge the important contributions of Native people."

Happy myth and ~~~~ are the key to that sentence. But I think you knew that.

Sure! And that's great! Doesn't make that fact that we celebrate a monster on a Monday in October untrue.

[JurisDictum]

The guy was a genocidal pirate. Who the fuck cares about disrespecting Columbus. We can acknowledge his importance in history class. I think you will find that we will do a better job of that if its not a politically charged topic.

But school should be open on his birthday. It is in Oregon anyway. I guess some like the indigenous people's day idea better. If you are angry at that -- I'm sensing a bit of white identity politics there. And nothing is more god damn stupid than feeling sorry for yourself for being white. White is still the way to go my friend. Despite all the recent nerfs.

Edit: the importance of Columbus historically -- is that he was the first one to establish sustained contact between Europe in the Americas. He is the guy that started the whole colonial era in the Americas. That's why he is more important to American history than the Vikings for example.

[jakerees]

Originally Posted by JurisDictum [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

We can acknowledge his importance in history class.

Hah, that made me think of a Seinfeld episode when Jerry and George are discussing explorers. George says his favorite is De Soto

Jerry: De Soto?
George: He found the Mississippi!
Jerry: Oh like they wouldn't have found that anyways.

[stormlord]

Originally Posted by mickmoranis [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

do you actually know anyone who doesnt?

I'm seriously thinking the sexes will segregate themselves. Why? Because a men can't be a man now without being discriminated or hated. Toxic masculinity is passive aggressive attack on males. So what does he do? He associates with other men. Two guys can get into a fist fight and still proudly slap each others back in friendship when it's over. A woman can slap a man, but if a man slaps her he gets 20 years in prison and the rest of his life is destroyed. Similarly, a woman can slap a man's butt and it's dismissed, but if a man does he's 5 years in prison and listed as a sexual predator. Granted, I'm exaggerating it, but the end result is men are getting the boot in the face. Men have no security--if they ever had any, and being under attack, they're seeking out each other instead of woman. Just to live freely. Society is to blame for stoking the flames of a witch hunt and making men into witches. My opinion.

MGTOW!

I also think non-binary genders will become common. Bisexuality will be prevalent. But people will also voluntarily kill their sex and sex drives with pills and surgeries. Asexuality. Being "fixed" might have health benefits. If the benefits are strong, society might quietly encourage people to do it.

This will no longer be a minority:
http://time.com/2889469/asexual-orientation/