Smell The Glove
Cancelled
Pay that. Even from you bunsie.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Cars & Transportation Feminism - over it
- Thread starter bunsen burner
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
Watch from 0:11 to 0:25 how she moves in close next to him (he's holding an umbrella) so she can then falsely accuse him of touching her.
She then knocks him off a ledge rendering him unconscious to the cheers of her feminist supporters. They don't even seem to know what they are angry about, they are just happy to vent their faux outrage at the innocent guy.
He should've stopped oppressing that womyn!
- Banned
- #957
A wicked woman stained by a truly wicked ideology. Her actions here show up feminism for what it is - a hatred of males.
To violence against men, Feminists don't say no. They only promote the PC version of saying no to violence against women. As I've said previously in your quoting of me, "folks should be paying attention to their (feminists') actions, for when it's weighed against their rhetoric is what shows up their hypocrisy." As I've also said previously ITT, violence is all that feminism has left, for facts and history are not on their side.
- Banned
- #958
lol
Feminist hypocrisy knows no bounds. Their double standards are so blatant and in your face that it shows that they have no shame or conscience.
- Banned
- #959
Feminism is a form of social engineering, and this is evidenced where her article reads: "reconstructed manhood”. Feminism emasculates males and makes them pathetic subordinate lapdogs and weak-willed, malleable, pushovers, all while it makes masculine females. Feminism is, in part, penis envy.
- Banned
- #960
... and rightfully so. What a self-deluded cretin she is.
A Swallow
Norm Smith Medallist
This image has made me so angry it has literally ruined my night. What a f*cking moron. Leigha? F*ck off Leigha you muppet.
Thank god no woman I know would ever be dumb enough to identify as a feminist. All feminism is doing is creating a generation of men who are rightfully fighting against it, and unfortunately, the good women will also be caught up in this backlash. None of my mates, male or female, would bat an eyelid if I gave an annoying feminist the beating they so richly deserve. The so-called 'man-children' are the next generation of males who will run this world, and they will not put up with the defective women who blame everyone but themselves for their life being miserable. It's a good thing that it's becoming more and more socially acceptable to deal with violent women in public with the necessary force.
However, it's important to separate out these crazies and not let them taint our view of the silent minority of women who are just getting on with their lives.
However, it's important to separate out these crazies and not let them taint our view of the silent minority of women who are just getting on with their lives.
- Thread starter
- Banned
- #963
Unfortunately I think you'll find the trend is that feminism is creeping into mainstream. I see it every single day from typical women who don't identify as feminists.
I couldn't give a flying f*** filled calzone about true feminists as they are minority extremists, but when the average woman is having feminist thoughts and views....it's time to worry.
- Banned
- #964
Too late. Way too late. Feminism has been mainstream for quite a long time now.
"True feminists"? Pfft! Take a read of this article about the use of "true feminists", "nice" feminists, NAFALT and how it's used as a shield to protect the feminist movement from scrutiny.
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/nice-feminists-grassroots-of-a-hate-movemen/
The grassroots of the movement, of the likes of what feminist pawns Nicky, Mantits and Roobs have shown ITT, acts as a social cushion between the public’s view of the movement, and the activism of its leadership; a wide-eyed innocent mask to hide the movement’s malignant soul. By presenting a “nice” face attached to the label, grassroots feminists draw attention away from the practical application of the movement’s ideology, and create the false impression that they are representative of the movement, rather than the movement being about the real-world actions taken in its name. This is a reason for the leadership to use advocacy and propagandized “education” initiatives (like Women’s Studies courses, and the insertion of political rhetoric into other areas of study) to cultivate a grassroots movement well armed with rhetoric and resentment, but low on detailed knowledge of the issues presented to them in their training.
This creates a population of brainwashed twits whose attachment to the label “feminist” is based on fluff and feelings. Being in agreement with each other in the belief that feminism is about fighting for equality, they view themselves as the movement’s mainstream even though their overt participation in the movement is mostly limited to providing it with free marketing for its name. As long as activist groups make effective use of the grassroots without becoming so overzealous as to make obvious the exploitative nature of the leadership’s relationship to the them, feminists will be able to continue to use their grassroots to filter otherwise socially unacceptable dogma, rhetoric, and terms into public discourse. They’ll be able to continue to point to that as evidence of their credibility when lobbying for discriminatory law and policy. In this way, leadership influence over the grassroots may be one of feminism’s strongest weapons:
“Nice” feminists are feminism’s propaganda drones – mindless of purpose and careless of the carnage they cause.
- Banned
- #965
Just to add regarding "true feminists":
If you really want to understand what feminism is you have to see through the games feminists play. One of their favorite games is bait and switch. They tell you there is a good feminism (a true feminism), and that you should just ignore those nasty "radical" feminists (after all, they're not "true" feminists). But then you come to find that the seemingly "good feminists" have a hidden agenda... There’s your bait and switch. Another one is the "fall of feminism" myth – the idea that once upon a time there was a good feminism, but now it has fallen from its ideal. There’s also "speed bump feminism" (those feminists like Christina Hoff Summers and Cathy Young, for example, who want to retain the ill-gotten gains of feminists, but want to slow down the agitation of their radical sisters, lest they piss off men so much that there is a revolution that rolls back those gains. Speed bump feminists want to slow down, not repeal, feminism). And so on…
In reality, all forms of feminism (in all cultures and throughout time) have always been about a transfer of goods, services, power, privilege, and status from men to women, irrespective of the harm it causes to men, children, the planet, or even to good women.
One of my favorite definitions of feminism is this one by a former Vice President of NCFM: "The female institution that subordinates the needs and nature of men to those of women, while promoting special entitlements, privileges, and protections for women, is feminism (although feminists would deny that is what feminism is about). But men have their own institution: chivalry is the male institution that subordinates the needs and nature of men to those of women, while promoting special entitlements, privileges, and protections for women."
That quote not only captures the defining characteristics of feminism, it neatly demonstrates how feminism and chivalry are two sides of the same coin. Naive people who don’t understand what feminism really is, end up buying into the lie that feminism is about equality, and then they can’t understand how traditionalists (e.g., conservatives) can support feminist policies like the "child support" racket. But, seeing feminism as it really is makes it clear how feminists opportunistically exploit the useful idiots that are chivalrous men, to continue the one-way gravy train.
If you are looking for a "true feminism", that NCFM VP’s definition is it, not that nonsense about equality. No feminist who ever existed has ever supported true equality. Whether you are talking about the first-wave feminists of the mid-1800's (those Seneca Falls gals who raged about women’s suffrage, but were mums about equality 15 years later when only men and boys were required to die fighting in the civil war), or about the 1960's feminists (who raged about equal pay but were not willing to do equal work), or third wave feminism, or any future feminism, it is all the same.
If you really want to understand what feminism is you have to see through the games feminists play. One of their favorite games is bait and switch. They tell you there is a good feminism (a true feminism), and that you should just ignore those nasty "radical" feminists (after all, they're not "true" feminists). But then you come to find that the seemingly "good feminists" have a hidden agenda... There’s your bait and switch. Another one is the "fall of feminism" myth – the idea that once upon a time there was a good feminism, but now it has fallen from its ideal. There’s also "speed bump feminism" (those feminists like Christina Hoff Summers and Cathy Young, for example, who want to retain the ill-gotten gains of feminists, but want to slow down the agitation of their radical sisters, lest they piss off men so much that there is a revolution that rolls back those gains. Speed bump feminists want to slow down, not repeal, feminism). And so on…
In reality, all forms of feminism (in all cultures and throughout time) have always been about a transfer of goods, services, power, privilege, and status from men to women, irrespective of the harm it causes to men, children, the planet, or even to good women.
One of my favorite definitions of feminism is this one by a former Vice President of NCFM: "The female institution that subordinates the needs and nature of men to those of women, while promoting special entitlements, privileges, and protections for women, is feminism (although feminists would deny that is what feminism is about). But men have their own institution: chivalry is the male institution that subordinates the needs and nature of men to those of women, while promoting special entitlements, privileges, and protections for women."
That quote not only captures the defining characteristics of feminism, it neatly demonstrates how feminism and chivalry are two sides of the same coin. Naive people who don’t understand what feminism really is, end up buying into the lie that feminism is about equality, and then they can’t understand how traditionalists (e.g., conservatives) can support feminist policies like the "child support" racket. But, seeing feminism as it really is makes it clear how feminists opportunistically exploit the useful idiots that are chivalrous men, to continue the one-way gravy train.
If you are looking for a "true feminism", that NCFM VP’s definition is it, not that nonsense about equality. No feminist who ever existed has ever supported true equality. Whether you are talking about the first-wave feminists of the mid-1800's (those Seneca Falls gals who raged about women’s suffrage, but were mums about equality 15 years later when only men and boys were required to die fighting in the civil war), or about the 1960's feminists (who raged about equal pay but were not willing to do equal work), or third wave feminism, or any future feminism, it is all the same.
MrCharisma
Club Legend
Testi-sac is still going!? (tl;dr)
bartel magic
Cancelled
- Apr 9, 2012
- 6,863
- 5,079
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- there is no one else but Geelong
Feminism has had an obvious impact on all aspects of male / female relations.
I was on the tram this morning when a woman of about 35 years of age got on.
A couple of stops into the trip she loudly bemoaned that no one had offered her a seat.
The young fellow next to me (about 25) quite rightly addressed her with the following:
You look neither, elderly or pregnant, and last time I checked, being female, didn't make you disabled. Shutup and stand like the rest of us!
She got off next stop.
I was on the tram this morning when a woman of about 35 years of age got on.
A couple of stops into the trip she loudly bemoaned that no one had offered her a seat.
The young fellow next to me (about 25) quite rightly addressed her with the following:
You look neither, elderly or pregnant, and last time I checked, being female, didn't make you disabled. Shutup and stand like the rest of us!
She got off next stop.
bartel magic
Cancelled
- Apr 9, 2012
- 6,863
- 5,079
- AFL Club
- Geelong
- Other Teams
- there is no one else but Geelong
Don't disagree mate, but as you said....it is a value system based on old fashioned beliefs. Not a right of passage for female travellers......but Im not very chilvarous like you I suppose!
I particularly liked your old fashioned chilvarous use of the term "chicks" too
Gough
Moderator
- Sep 29, 2006
- 74,279
- 138,746
- AFL Club
- Hawthorn
- Moderator
- #971
I've never possessed a drivers license so have spent my adult life catching public transport and never in over 20 years has your scenario happened to me, I'd be more inclined to just blame it on a gobby bird than any form of feminist thinking.
- Banned
- #972
In your case it's TL;Can't Read. So, it's little wonder you stick to short OT snipes. Given the lack of intelligent contribution by you is evidence that this thread's topic goes well over your head.
Testi-sac? Much projecting of your desire for something you don't have, it seems.
- Banned
- #973
This woman's attitude is an example of the sense of entitlement that many women have these days.
- Banned
- #974
Chivalry and feminism are two sides of the same coin, as highlighted in post #965.
- Banned
- #975
Don't disagree mate, but as you said....it is a value system based on old fashioned beliefs. Not a right of passage for female travellers......but Im not very chilvarous like you I suppose!
I particularly liked your old fashioned chilvarous use of the term "chicks" too
The equality that feminism claims to call for, (but in actuality doesn't), can't rightfully exist alongside chivalry. For feminism to co-exist with chivalry is for females to have their cake and eat it too. Chivalry contradicts equality.
- Status
Similar threads
