Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "Feminism 2.0 | 5 Minute Video" video.

  1. Brad Bisinger I'm not placing goalposts anywhere. I am being honest to the best of my abilities and reading into what's being discussed, you are just all over the place and can't seem to be able to understand a sentence. >Just because you seem to think that a woman who is having casual sex is hurting herself Strawman argument, I never stated that. Again, you don't seem to have understood a single sentence of what I said. >Why is it that men aren't hurting themselves? .. because they're vile and perverts by your definition? For some reason though women can't be perverts Again, you're misrepresenting the argument. If a man sleeps around with women he's the villain, and this is felt across society. Not just some group. Name anything positive about that trope. 007 is a misogynist (which even Judi Dench's M tells him). The stereotypical guy in a band that sleeps around is seen as a bum and no parents want them dating their daughter. There's nothing positive. Which is why there's so few of them and it usually involves having a ton of money/being famous. >I didn't say men are always oppressors. I didn't say all men are oppressors "the reality is that men often ARE oppressors of women" Yezus H. Christo. You sure did make it sound like you said those things. >but men in power often do Oh. But women are the majority and hold greater voting power. And those in power usually appeal to women to gain votes. Obama's ad about voting that made it sound like losing virginity? The multiple bills that benefit women in terms of custody, lower the alimony debt a man has to have before it's considered a felony, etc. not to mention the opposition to gender neutral rape laws or the provisions to allow male circumcision in anti-genital mutilation legislation. The fact is, government is indeed composed by a lot of men - so why are feminists running to the government to solve their problems? >You don't have to look hard at the world to see which gender is in control Have unprotected sex and call me back on that one. You'll see who'll have a dog collar on the neck 9 months afterwards. Women can get you sent to the HR department because the stuff you put on your desk is "inappropriate" (and we live in a Victorian era in which women can't even be exposed to anything less dignifying or they'll faint) but they can read Fifty Shades of Grey on the job, on the bus, on the park, whatever.
    2
  2. ***** actually, it made it even easier for a woman to have sex, get pregnant, get custody and force the father to pay alimony or he goes to jail. Men can't reject parenthood. Women can.
    1
  3. 1. The problem is that even according to a conservative viewpoint, a "whore" is only damaging herself/her reputation. A man who sleeps around, according to most if not all society, has damaged all the women he's been with. Male sexuality is inherently seen as predatory and vile. The fact is: most men aren't getting laid causally on a consistent basis, and many men have never had casual sex. It's not a typical male perk because most men can't achieve that situation in the first place. 2. Competition. It's great. Not on a social level. You moved the goalposts of the argument by introducing your workplace analogy - to defend a ridiculous "us vs them" mentality that is poisoning normal, healthy relationships. 3. "This whole video has the attitude that women should be subservient" - despite saying that the word "No." is important? Do you even try? 4. "a women's job is to "civilize man". What a joke." >implying that women aren't what keeps men in place. If there were no women to impress or children to raise, no man would ever go to college and get a great job to impress women and provide a good childhood to his offspring. We'd be all wearing crocs, tan cargo shorts, huge "give me a dollar" beards, drinking beer, farting and watching the game all day.
    1
  4. Brad Bisinger  1. Again, you're moving the goalposts. Female sexuality is never seen as vile and predatory. Never. Even the people who criticize women's sexuality don't see her as damaging to the men she has sex with. However, men are perverts, creeps and they defile what they touch. It has nothing to do with with aggression or lack of trying. Look at the tropes - even How I Met Your Mother, which actually does a great job of not evidently disrespecting the women Barney sleeps with despite seven seasons of him banging a ton of women. They are victims. They have daddy issues, etc. They're always victims. 2. "the video doesn't make that distinction" - And it wasn't necessary to make it unless you were purposefully trying to find things to be mad about. 3. "men often ARE oppressors of women" - I'm kinda new in this anti-feminism thing but debate me, I'm ready. How are you oppressing women?
    1
  5. ***** it's called greentexting and I use it to make quotations. Makes it easier to read than a block of text when addressing multiple points. I normally don't get bothered with people pathetically trying to call me out of the ">" (because they can't make up a single argument) but I noticed that every single one of you clowns calls it "meme arrows" because they saw it on 9fag or some other crappy website. If you're going to call me out after you've recognized the ">" at least call it the proper name.
    1
  6. ***** then don't call it "meme arrows" outside whatever cesspool of stolen content you picked up that name from. l jess what gender war? I don't see a gender war anywhere. I see a few people lobbying to get more government money and trying to stifle free speech to prevent their feminist racket from being criticized. The fact is that men in average would work less and study less if attracting the opposite gender wasn't an issue. http://econpapers.repec.org/article/ucpjhucap/v_3a2_3ai_3a4_3ay_3a2008_3ap_3a337-378.htm This is not gender warfare. Men want money. Why? Because it gives them the upper hand in the dating pool. 75% of women wouldn't date an unemployed man, only 21% would. http://www.businessnewsdaily.com/2753-dating-unemployed-men-women.html Is it gender warfare for a woman to want a provider in case she decides to have children? No. It's pure logic. I am studying engineering. But if I cut all the expenses I could ever have in dating, marriage and raising children, I could just be working a blue collar job right out of highschool and I would be already making money and advancing my career - and I would have enough disposable income to do what I want. And just study engineering as a hobby. Buying some books and not having to spend time and money in college.
    1
  7. l jess That wasn't exactly my point, because I'm not speaking from a "Men Going Their Own Way" point of view. If by chance someone finds me someone worth spending the rest of her life with, of course that I will overlook the costs of dating, marriage and raising a child. Even if statistically it can bite me in the ass, I would prefer to be economically stable to be able to provide or if needed to have enough savings to be a "stay at home dad" for a few years. But if in a hypothetical situation I had the option to shut down love and procreation at the brain level and never have second thoughts... I'd seriously consider it and drop out, have an adventure. I'm not even worried about "gold diggers". Dating these days is fundamentally broken and I'd rather meet new people on other terms.
    1