Dangers of Feminism

[Angela53510]

View attachment 75146
Guys, feminists and man-haters are not the same thing. Sometimes they fall into the same category, but not always. You know how the media paints all conservatives as crazy, back-woods, gun-toting inbred lunatics? The same thing is done with feminists. And only the crazy and the extremists are the ones who make the news.

Most of us don't just wake up one morning and think, "Hey, women should be empowered." Most of us are survivors on one level or another. The only reason why we make a big point that women should have the same rights and opportunities as men (that's ALL that feminism really is), is that we have been abused, bullied, or otherwise mistreated based on our gender. Or we saw it happen to those we care about.

That isn't to say then men have never been mistreated or that evils are never done in the name of feminism. But many horrible things have been done in the name of Christianity, too. (Crusades, Inquisition, witch trials: any of that sound familiar?) But you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. You support the good that a movement does, and try to sort the crazies from the rank and file.

And you don't have to agree with someone else's position. But you should support our right to make that decision. Empowering women is NOT the same thing as castrating men. One gender can be raised up without pulling the other one down. Unfortunately, because we live in a fallen world, we don't always get it right. It seems that when government or policy makers get involved, the pendulum swings too far in either direction. The discrimination against men is equally wrong. That doesn't mean that feminism itself is wrong. After all, women's suffrage movement was only successful—after countless decades of gaining no real ground—because men got involved. Both genders worked together when one was being taken advantage of. We should do the same today. When either group is experiencing discrimination, we should lay down our titles, reach across the aisle, and help our fellow human, regardless if our genders are the same.

Great post and so true! I guess radical extremes have given a bad name to both patriarchalism and feminism. It doesn't mean that good cannot be found in both movements. Sometimes the radicals are most vocal, and that is why people think that the extreme view is the only view. I guess that is the squeaky wheel getting the grease. The ones who overwhelm the media these days, which is the big influence in western society, are seen as the "winners" even if they are a small minority.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Two Christian pro-life sisters recently found out, the hard way, that secular feminists are intolerant, want only their view expressed and codified into law, and are not above violence to achieve their objectives.

Here we have an account in which a university feminist professor is reported as leading an attack on two pro-life Christian sisters legally protesting abortion in a 'free speech zone' screaming at them "I may be a thief but you're a terrorist!" as she assaulted them:

"A professor of feminist studies who specializes in teaching pornography, queer theory and black film is accused of going berserk at a California pro-life demonstration last week, stealing and destroying an anti-abortion sign and assaulting a teen girl who tried to retrieve it. Police are now investigating the events involving Mireille Miller-Young, who teaches at the University of California, Santa Barbara."

UCSB Professor Accused of Assaulting Anti-Abortion Activist The Santa Barbara Independent

One of the sisters noted on her blog: "Nothing like this has ever happened to me before and I hope it will never happen again, but it did not destroy the work that we did. We were able to handle individuals. What we did not expect to encounter was a professor inciting a mob. Although we were interrupted, we reached a lot of students."

[video=youtube_share;jv6m2P7UK1M]http://youtu.be/jv6m2P7UK1M[/video]

Keep the faith ladies. You two sisters are awesome!

You feminists, on the other hand, not so much.

 

[Misty77]

Two Christian pro-life sisters recently found out, the hard way, that secular feminists are intolerant, want only their view expressed and codified into law, and are not above violence to achieve their objectives.

Here we have an account in which a university feminist professor is reported as leading an attack on two pro-life Christian sisters legally protesting abortion in a 'free speech zone' screaming at them "I may be a thief but you're a terrorist!" as she assaulted them:

"A professor of feminist studies who specializes in teaching pornography, queer theory and black film is accused of going berserk at a California pro-life demonstration last week, stealing and destroying an anti-abortion sign and assaulting a teen girl who tried to retrieve it. Police are now investigating the events involving Mireille Miller-Young, who teaches at the University of California, Santa Barbara."

UCSB Professor Accused of Assaulting Anti-Abortion Activist The Santa Barbara Independent

One of the sisters noted on her blog: "Nothing like this has ever happened to me before and I hope it will never happen again, but it did not destroy the work that we did. We were able to handle individuals. What we did not expect to encounter was a professor inciting a mob. Although we were interrupted, we reached a lot of students."

[video=youtube_share;jv6m2P7UK1M]http://youtu.be/jv6m2P7UK1M[/video]

Keep the faith ladies. You two sisters are awesome!

You feminists, on the other hand, not so much.

Thank you for proving my point that only the crazies and the extremists of any viewpoint make the news. Now can you please stop being hateful?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Love, not hate, compels me to share the dangers of modern secular liberal feminism. If you want to see the face of hateful, look no further than feminist attacks: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=eb8_1394935079

 

[Misty77]

Love, not hate, compels me to share the dangers of modern secular liberal feminism. If you want to see the face of hateful, look no further than feminist attacks: LiveLeak.com - Homosexual Bigots Demand Castration & Murder of Christians!

Patriarchy has hateful faces attached to it, too.


Can we close this thread now? Please?!?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

ALL men, good actors and bad, suffer under the yoke of modern secular liberal feminism across Western civilization presently.

The current iteration of secular liberal feminism in Western nations is really atheistic anti-Christian female supremacy behind a mask and threatens men's lives to such an extent that large numbers of them now opt out of marriage and to a lesser extent no longer want to have children. It also poses a continuing danger to the Church which it directly and indirectly attacks frequently.

Denial is no longer an option for Christian men with respect to the danger this female supremacist movement poses to their lives as it seeks control of government, control of institutions, control of public education, control of the rule of law, control of their very lives to bring them under the yoke of its bondage.

If you don't wish to participate in a discussion on the dangers of feminism, you don't have to. Simply leave. But attempting to silence the free speech of those who would discuss the topic from a different perspective than your own while painting them as "hateful" for doing so merely shows that you are part of the problem not the solution.

So do what men are doing and opt out. Goodbye.

Patriarchy has hateful faces attached to it, too.


Can we close this thread now? Please?!?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

"Forty-three percent of U.S. high school boys and young college men report they had an unwanted sexual experience -- 95 percent with a woman."

“Sexual victimization continues to be a pervasive problem in the United States, but the victimization of men is rarely explored,” said lead author Bryana H. French, PhD, of the University of Missouri. “Our findings can help lead to better prevention by identifying the various types of coercion that men face and by acknowledging women as perpetrators against men.”

High school boys, young men report a woman coerced sex from them - UPI.com

Psychology of Men & Masculinity®

The result of so much female exploitation of boys and young men for female sexual gratification causes psychological distress (e.g. moral guilt) and opens the door to risky sexual behaviors even addictively because of the male physiology. These behaviors, of course, also present the risk of disease (STDs, Aids, etc...).

Boys and young men need biblical standards and the parameters God intended for them to have to avoid the guilt of sexual immorality and addiction to immoral behaviors that sex outside of God's design poses.

Instead of exploiting boys and young men for sex, women should be encouraging them to reach for God's will.

In God's hands, in the institution of Christian marriage, sex is beautiful and godly. We are designed for it. Outside of that, it poses great risks to every area of our life.

Sex: Where It All Starts - Focus on the Family

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

But then, feminists have largely ruined relationships between men and women so...

Interestingly, they are increasingly unhappy about what they have wrought: The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness

Even having to deal with female competition in a service sector dominated economy where more females graduate from college and the risks of no fault divorces, biased child-custody laws, paternity fraud, false rape accusations, affirmative action, welfare culture, etc... threaten to tear apart their lives for decades should they follow the traditional path: men are increasingly more happy than women.

The reason for this is simply that they are opting-out of the life feminists intended for them to live and living their own life.

And men aren't really talking about it much either. They don't want to face false charges of harassment which occur with regularity due to a feminist retooled legal environment nor do they wish to incur the wrath of angry feminists: they just do it (e.g. opt out and live their own life).

"As the author of three books on the American family and its intersection with pop culture, I’ve spent thirteen years examining social agendas as they pertain to sex, parenting, and gender roles. During this time, I’ve spoken with hundreds, if not thousands, of men and women.

And in doing so, I’ve accidentally stumbled upon a subculture of men who’ve told me, in no uncertain terms, that they’re never getting married. When I ask them why, the answer is always the same.
Women aren’t women anymore." -Susanne Venker

Women are angry. Women are defensive. A generation of women has been raised to view men as an enemy and themselves as equal to or superior to a male.

So, men are adjusting. Feminism serves the non-Christian male well. He can have casual sex with protection and few to no responsibilities whatsoever. He can opt-out of a life as a beast of burden and use his utility for himself, his career, and toward pursuits he enjoys and finds pleasurable without the entanglements that women bring.

It's the Christian male and most women Christian or otherwise that feminism hurts the most. Make no mistake.

 

[presidente]

Patriarchy has hateful faces attached to it, too.


Can we close this thread now? Please?!?

Why would anyone do that? I'm down with keeping a thread open to expose the dangers of Feminism.

 

[presidente]

I know some people blame the high divorce rate on Feminism. Honestly, I think there is some sort of relationship. I'm married, but if I were single and knew what I knew now, a Feminist would not be in my consideration set for two reasons. 1) not being in agreement on how to live life and 2) possible high risk for divorce.

I wonder if anyone has ever done academic research to determine if women who self-identify as 'Feminists' or fit some academic definition of 'Feminist' are more likely to have been divorced. A questionnaire could also try to determine if the divorcees were feminists before the divorce. I wouldn't be surprised if there is a high correlation between self-identifying as a Feminist and having been divorced or believing Feminist ideas and having been divorced. The same could be done for complementarian ideas. Also, asking whether interviewees had a happy marriage at certain stages of it would be good, and comparing male and female responses to see how it correlates with having a Feminist wife.

You'd think someone has done that research by now. If not, it should be done. Most Feminist research is probably done by Feminists, and the results of that kind of research might not portray feminists in the most positive light.

 

[presidente]

"Forty-three percent of U.S. high school boys and young college men report they had an unwanted sexual experience -- 95 percent with a woman."

“Sexual victimization continues to be a pervasive problem in the United States, but the victimization of men is rarely explored,” said lead author Bryana H. French, PhD, of the University of Missouri. “Our findings can help lead to better prevention by identifying the various types of coercion that men face and by acknowledging women as perpetrators against men.”

Most of this sounds like men and boys giving in to a temptation to fornicate. The large percentages are for 'verbal coercion' and seduction. Men, as the victims of 'unwanted' seduction. Maybe it's talking about cases where the man found the woman unattractive, she persisted, but since the young man had no sexual morals to speak of, he just gave in and had an 'unwanted' sexual experience. 7% were related to alcohol. I suppose it's possible to consider some of those cases to be rape.

Churches need to focus on teaching young men to withstand sexual immorality. Proverbs deals with it, particularly with married women seducing single men. Maybe that was a big problem back then. In a society where most of the young women are virgins and marry young, the more dangerous segment for sexual corruption in society might have been unfaithful wives-- at least the dangerous segment for the young male the book is addressed to.

If these sorts of things were in marriage, 'unwanted sexual experiences' in marriage, I don't think they'd usually traumatize most men. If a man got drunk and his wife got him to have sex, or if a woman verbally seduces her husband, I suspect that wouldn't damage the psyche of the average man. Not the 'seduction' by his wife. Drunkennes can be harmful.

 

[Elizabeth619]

Sexual victimization? What? Unless someone is physically forced into sex(rape) there's no "victimization". There's no reason why a teenage boy can't say NO. Call it whatever you want to make it look like someone is a victim, but if they willingly do have sex and no walk away then there is no victim.
I think the better word for this is guilt and consequences of their act and not victimization.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Whatever positive image the word feminist may have had, it has been tarnished by those who have made it their own, and I, for one, am content to leave the militants in full possession of the term.

— Dale O'Leary in her book
The Gender Agenda: Redefining Equality (p. 23)
(Dale O'Leary devoted a full two chapters of her book to describe and chronicle
radical feminism and "really radical feminism." —WHS)
​

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

"The study, published in the journal Psychology of Men and Masculinity, finds 18 percent report sexual coercion by physical force; 31 percent say they were verbally coerced; 26 percent describe unwanted seduction by sexual behaviors; and 7 percent say they were compelled after being given alcohol or drugs."

The study includes BOYS and young men in high school who are MINORS as well as undergraduate college students Elizabeth.

Read more: High school boys, young men report a woman coerced sex from them - UPI.com

Part of the problem is that people don't realize that promiscuous sex for males at a young age has definable negative effects on their personalities and that they certainly can be victims of unwanted sexual advances, sexual coercion, sexual harassment, and rape.

That thinking needs to change.

Sexual victimization? What? Unless someone is physically forced into sex(rape) there's no "victimization". There's no reason why a teenage boy can't say NO. Call it whatever you want to make it look like someone is a victim, but if they willingly do have sex and no walk away then there is no victim.
I think the better word for this is guilt and consequences of their act and not victimization.

 

[TheKringledOne]

I don't know if we can make the link between females who sexually harass or rape males as a side effect of feminism.

edit: Perhaps I missed some context...

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

You didn't. It was a study I ran across while researching and I thought it was interesting. But feminists are always asserting that men are rapists, men are molesters, men are evil, men are... etc... while ignoring what women are doing statistically speaking.

Look at this study released by the D.O.J on the 2008-2009 reporting period showing that children incarcerated in juvenile facilities were sexually molested by women slightly more than 95% of the time while male staff accounted for only 4.6% of the sexual molestation of the minors incarcerated who reported sexual abuse.

Read this: http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf

The report states that women constitute only 42% of the staff of these facilities in the report, yet commit 95% of the sexual abuse, coast to coast in these facilities.

Read this: Child Maltreatment 2011 | Children's Bureau | Administration for Children and Families

I'd like to know how much feminism has contributed to this through purveying the perception that men are the primary aggressors when the statistics are showing that in many environments exactly the opposite is true and how my government is going to take steps to correct the problem for the welfare of the victims.

Single parent homes are much worse with respect to abuse than two parent nuclear families.

Read this: http://americanvalues.org/catalog/pdfs/researchbrief7.pdf

And feminism certainly has played a primary role in the decline of the nuclear family and the rise of the single parent household.

I don't know if we can make the link between females who sexually harass or rape males as a side effect of feminism.

edit: Perhaps I missed some context...

 

[TheKringledOne]

I've read some of this before, I agree with a lot of the data and have reason to think that there might be more of this behavior from women going on then is currently being reported.

Based on some historical evidence, I would say that this doesn't have all that much to do with the rise of feminism. I know plenty of people who label themselves feminist that actually think it is important that the public gets exposed to information about women being the perpetrators of sexual attacks.

I would argue that there isn't enough information to link the decline of the nuclear family with the increased support of feminist ideology. There are plenty of other changes that have happened in America throughout the last 60 years that can also explain it.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Of course, other important factors contributed but I'll disagree with you that feminism wasn't a primary driver in the decline of the two parent nuclear family (while simultaneously influencing many of those other contributing factors) creating an environment in which young men find it more beneficial to simply opt out of nuclear marriage entirely as the preponderance of evidence I've read and analyzed demonstrate that feminism was instrumental toward and committed to that objective both knowingly and unknowingly.

 

[presidente]

Sexual victimization? What? Unless someone is physically forced into sex(rape) there's no "victimization". There's no reason why a teenage boy can't say NO. Call it whatever you want to make it look like someone is a victim, but if they willingly do have sex and no walk away then there is no victim.
I think the better word for this is guilt and consequences of their act and not victimization.

Children manipulated or coerced in into sex are also victims. Passed out drunk or drugged people can be victims, too.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I will say Kringled, that Western Civilization (or any civilization which possess it for that matter) discards a true understanding of God and His morality at their peril. Fascism and Marxism could not have arisen to do the damage they did in an environment which the vast majority of people both genuinely understood, internalized, and practiced God's morality with a knowledge of the truth in a personal relationship with Him through Christ.

I would argue that despotism nor a maligned theocracy would last in such an environment. Why even a democracy gone wrong would not be able to continue down a wrong course in such an environment without the people correcting it.

This idea that the values of democracy are part of the movement of history and can only take us to a better place and therefore God and His normative morality can be safely discarded is delusional. The lessons of fascism, state atheism, and the vulnerabilities of democracy are now historical fact.

This idea that liberalism or conservatism can be disjoined from natural law in the Christian interpretation such as John Stuart Mill and John Dewey taught and that the only real danger confronting us is being closed to the emergent, the new, the manifestations of progress is at the core of the problem...

...with respect to modern and post modern socio-political movements which certainly DOES include modern liberal/progressive feminism.

As Paley pointed out, without God and His sanctions of eternal punishment and reward it is difficult to find motives that “are likely to be found sufficient to withhold men from the gratification of lust, revenge, envy, ambition, avarice” as a few examples (and I would add especially in economically difficult times).

Furthermore, as Allen Bloom pointed out, this idea that no attention has to be paid to the fundamental principles (e.g. natural law as per the Christian interpretation) and God's moral virtues with sanction that incline people to live according to them turned liberalism to shed a genuine orthodox understanding of God and His normative morality and replace them with false views resulted in poisoned alternatives.

The feminism we observe in the world today is but one flower on a weed, in other words.