Feminism and history

[Karha of Honor]

Frankly speaking, it looks quite like he/she chased you away.

...A thought.

Truematis did not post in almost 20 days since the incident.

That shows confidence in his words.

Yeah, right...

Sure...

Not that I believe you or condone your actions, but do you have any proof that he left under such circumstance?

I say my speculation is reasonable.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Frankly speaking, it looks quite like he/she chased you away.

...A thought.

Truematis did not post in almost 20 days since the incident.

That shows confidence in his words.

Yeah, right...

Sure...

Not that I believe you or condone your actions, but do you have any proof that he left under such circumstance?

I say my speculation is reasonable.

Fair enough.

So that's how you want to live out your life. As a bully?

[Riedquat]

That only applies to biology. Not intellectually or mentally. Emotionally, men and women are the same.

You base that claim on what exactly? Admittedly it's tricky to separate out from cultural effects and there are always people who are exceptions but I've never seen anything terribly persuasive to tell me that men and women are not different. There's certainly difference in animals, which don't have the same social pressures, and humans are just another species of animal.

I really don't like this "everyone and everything must be the same" attitude (other than for the aspects that are so obvious there's no point in denying them, such as physiology). What's wrong with everyone not being the same?

The first paragraph aptly describes how I felt about that statement. Except that is, for the animal thing. Like I've never been able to tell the difference between a male and female dog except for maybe maternity wise for mothers (and like toxic fraternizing behavior between racoon fathers lol), and that's I think more of a circumstance. Anyhoo yeah I feel like the physiological differences are maybe(?) a bit persuasive? Wouldn't known estrogen and testosterone discrepancies be a possible culprit for emotional influence?

The maternity bit is one thing (and a fairly large one). It varies from species to species too. Cats, for example - female cats usually have smaller territories than males, even when there aren't any others around to compete with. Obviously we can't get into their heads to work out if they view the world differently but the point is that there are observable differences. Maybe hormones play a part, I don't know, but that would still be a difference.

[Karha of Honor]

Fair enough.

So that's how you want to live out your life. As a bully?

I just made it clear that he won't live in groupthink central on here?

That is bullying to you?

[clearspira]

How about this? A RadFem believes every rape accusation, man on woman, no matter how flimsy. While I've had cases before I haven't believed and have gone on record saying so. As for Kavanaugh, while I'm inclined to lean towards "probably" (with a possibility for "probably not"), it's that I divide him into the anti-choice camp that makes me suspect he'd be anti-woman. Of course, what his GOP buddies have said over the years haven't helped. And I'm not naive enough to think there can't be cases where men can't organize trains on a single woman to abuse her that way. History is full of such cases. With that said, though, this is all meaningless outside a courtroom, and if he is guilty, he should be tried. Wouldn't his DNA be on the victim? I know rape kits get thrown out, but you'd think somebody would have tried. All in all, I lean towards, 55% probably, 45% probably not. A RadFem would be 100% "He did it, castrate him!" Then again, I followed that case only from secondhand reports, which can be faulty.

The wiki for radical feminism doesn't say anything about believing every accusation.

A RadFem also thinks men can't be abused by women that way, a "man is always eager" bullshit. And will always sneer at men accusing women that way.

Also not sure about this per the wiki.

Wiki's can be written by anyone. Come on, you're better than this (usually).

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

How about this? A RadFem believes every rape accusation, man on woman, no matter how flimsy. While I've had cases before I haven't believed and have gone on record saying so. As for Kavanaugh, while I'm inclined to lean towards "probably" (with a possibility for "probably not"), it's that I divide him into the anti-choice camp that makes me suspect he'd be anti-woman. Of course, what his GOP buddies have said over the years haven't helped. And I'm not naive enough to think there can't be cases where men can't organize trains on a single woman to abuse her that way. History is full of such cases. With that said, though, this is all meaningless outside a courtroom, and if he is guilty, he should be tried. Wouldn't his DNA be on the victim? I know rape kits get thrown out, but you'd think somebody would have tried. All in all, I lean towards, 55% probably, 45% probably not. A RadFem would be 100% "He did it, castrate him!" Then again, I followed that case only from secondhand reports, which can be faulty.

The wiki for radical feminism doesn't say anything about believing every accusation.

A RadFem also thinks men can't be abused by women that way, a "man is always eager" bullshit. And will always sneer at men accusing women that way.

Also not sure about this per the wiki.

Wiki's can be written by anyone. Come on, you're better than this (usually).

They're not just written by anybody. That's not quite how wikipedia works.

[Yukaphile]

I've had kind of an interesting period in my life, from being a hardcore lefty, to a RadFem (that's all I cared about), to ModFem, and the reason why is whenever I see victim-blaming going on, or rape apologia, or bad messaging and bad history that pertains to it. When someone is irresponsible that way, and thus spreads the wrong message, it really rankles me.

[Darth Wedgius]

That only applies to biology. Not intellectually or mentally. Emotionally, men and women are the same. Which let me ask you, if a woman rapes a man and she gets pregnant off it, is he a victim? I think he is, same way a woman raped who gets pregnant is also a victim. I

For what it's worth, you're right, it is possible for a woman to rape a man, get pregnant, and for him to be the victim:

Nick Olivas became a father at 14, a fact he wouldn't learn for eight years.

While in high school, Olivas had sex with a 20-year-old woman. As he sees it now, she took advantage of a lonely kid going through a rough patch at home.

State law says a child younger than 15 cannot consent with an adult under any circumstance, making Olivas a rape victim. Olivas didn't press charges and says he didn't realize at the time that it was even something to consider.

The two went their separate ways. Olivas, now 24 and living in Phoenix, graduated from high school, went to college and became a medical assistant.

Then two years ago, the state served him with papers demanding child support. That's how he found out he had a then-6-year-old daughter.

But on the basis of women and men being the same emotionally, high testosterone in women sometimes correlates with male-ish behavior (e.g., higher sex drive, more risk-taking... I don't know if stopping to ask for directions has been tested), so I think science says that biology does matter to some degree to emotional reactions. Undoubtedly culture matters too... pink used to be a traditional male color and blue a traditional female color, and AFAIK there's no direct biological reason men generally don't wear frilly dresses.

As far as some things go, like the tendency of women to focus more on jobs helping people and less in STEM or manufacturing, it could be one, it could be the other, it could be both, it could be neither. Since the push to get more women into STEM, there have been fewer women going into STEM, whereas in cultures with more unequal social roles you often get more women in STEM.

[Yukaphile]

I've never thought otherwise.

[clearspira]

How about this? A RadFem believes every rape accusation, man on woman, no matter how flimsy. While I've had cases before I haven't believed and have gone on record saying so. As for Kavanaugh, while I'm inclined to lean towards "probably" (with a possibility for "probably not"), it's that I divide him into the anti-choice camp that makes me suspect he'd be anti-woman. Of course, what his GOP buddies have said over the years haven't helped. And I'm not naive enough to think there can't be cases where men can't organize trains on a single woman to abuse her that way. History is full of such cases. With that said, though, this is all meaningless outside a courtroom, and if he is guilty, he should be tried. Wouldn't his DNA be on the victim? I know rape kits get thrown out, but you'd think somebody would have tried. All in all, I lean towards, 55% probably, 45% probably not. A RadFem would be 100% "He did it, castrate him!" Then again, I followed that case only from secondhand reports, which can be faulty.

The wiki for radical feminism doesn't say anything about believing every accusation.

A RadFem also thinks men can't be abused by women that way, a "man is always eager" bullshit. And will always sneer at men accusing women that way.

Also not sure about this per the wiki.

Wiki's can be written by anyone. Come on, you're better than this (usually).

They're not just written by anybody. That's not quite how wikipedia works.

I could go there right now and write on it.