Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Men's Group
In reply to the discussion: A number of my issues with the brand of Feminism on DU [View all]nomorenomore08
(13,324 posts)63. "I don't really think women's interests will be better served with more Michelle Bachmanns and less
Sherrod Browns."
Of course. But I also don't think it's any coincidence that the countries with the highest proportion of female legislators (e.g. Sweden) generally score the highest on gender equality.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
141 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
It is such a strange dynamic. The "Greatest" page is nearly always plastered with
Doctor_J
Sep 2014
#1
It's been decided, in an OP saying "Yeah, yeah....I know men get abused, everyone knows that!"...
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
Sep 2014
#2
The fact that reciprocally violent relationships are the ones most likely to produce injured women..
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#49
I think dealing with intimate partner violence as a whole is vitally important, yes.
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#54
There have been easily 500 times more DU posts upset about spiderwoman's butt, than about ebola.
Warren DeMontague
Sep 2014
#5
We're a shallow, superficial culture that likes to squabble over the most inane bullshit.
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#10
On the one hand, I'm not going to dictate to someone else what they should consider important.
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#13
Same here. There's a lot of silliness on DU, and it's not limited to any particular faction. n/t
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#16
I can more or less see where you're coming from, but I still think you're over-generalizing.
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#11
The thing is, when people insult and personally attack others fairly regularly
Warren DeMontague
Sep 2014
#14
I do think you've been treated unfairly, and misrepresented, by certain posters. I've said as much
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#17
"Some people just seem to have this need to divide the whole world into "good guys" and "bad guys" "
Veilex
Sep 2014
#20
Point taken. But I think you have to consider what's at stake, not just in this country but globally
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#25
"you have to consider what's at stake, not just in this country but globally" - And I do.
Veilex
Sep 2014
#27
"I refuse to support them to the exclusion of others social and economic issues."
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#28
"folks (not all of them male) have a tendency to be somewhat dismissive of feminist issues"
Veilex
Sep 2014
#29
The world is filled with double standards, many of which do great harm to one gender or even both.
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#19
"The world is filled with double standards" - While true, that doesn't excuse it.
Veilex
Sep 2014
#21
I didn't say it excused it. But frankly, I have better things to worry about.
nomorenomore08
Sep 2014
#24
In what sense are white people, or men, systematically discriminated against?
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#47
So examples that comply 100% with the definitions given upthread would fall on deaf ears?
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#57
Men do have a lot of legitimate problems in this society - incarceration, homelessness, etc.
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#58
So discrimination against men administered by other men is not oppression?
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#59
Of course it's still oppressive. I didn't really mean to suggest otherwise.
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#62
So you'd call it oppressive, but not "systematically discriminated against"?
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#66
Systematic discrimination against men *by women* probably isn't possible other than in very specific
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#69
Like a school district where the majority of administrators are women, discriminating against male
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#73
Which is the same thing as saying lots of women like traditional gender roles
Major Nikon
Oct 2014
#78
it sounds that you actually like traditional gender roles - and so, excuse the enforcement of them.
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#79
I guess you could feel that way if you don't get around much. Traditional roles are rapidly dying
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#81
I get around enough not to rely on anecdotal evidence and biased perceptions
Major Nikon
Oct 2014
#82
LOL, anything else you can think of to deny that women actually like working and or deserve to be as
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#85
his point is all women "deserve it" because we don't all vote progressively enough. you would have
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#95
nonsense, you repeatedly assert that if women wanted things any other way, they'd have voted for it
bettyellen
Nov 2014
#100
Nonsense, you imply it all the time. Sorry- you cannot post making excuses for regressive bullshit
bettyellen
Nov 2014
#105
I'm so sorry you can't handle the conversation without having emotional issues-
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#89
This is why I use mansplaining exactly how it is meant = as a conversation ENDER
Tuesday Afternoon
Oct 2014
#91
Yeah, that was classic gaslighting.... and I am sure they would argue that gaslighting is something
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#92
It's fucking hilarious that anyone would claim that women do not want equal pay or opportunity
bettyellen
Oct 2014
#94
When asked, more women than men respond that time off is more important than money
lumberjack_jeff
Nov 2014
#97
empowerment is nothing without equal opportunity and pay- neither of which exists
bettyellen
Nov 2014
#98
I see the distinction you're trying to make, but I don't think raw numbers tell the whole story.
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#56
You see it everywhere from school board, to city council to the presidency.
lumberjack_jeff
Oct 2014
#60
"I don't really think women's interests will be better served with more Michelle Bachmanns and less
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#63
To be fair, I think she was referring to "sexism" in a systematic - not individual - sense.
nomorenomore08
Oct 2014
#46
So, I posted a video, and the response I got... well, I should say it was surprising, but it wasn't
Veilex
Nov 2014
#114
The actions of some of the gender warriors betray any sort of movement towards equality
Major Nikon
Jan 2015
#131
It is obvious that most of the traffic on this forum is from people looking for something to alert.
lumberjack_jeff
Jan 2015
#134
The irony is that this is a protected group, yet the standard of conduct is higher.
lumberjack_jeff
Jan 2015
#138