Women are villains, men are saints

placidmarlin3 said:I don't think this is just some isolated issue found in specific PDF files or niche forums; rather, it’s a genuine reflection of how little the general public actually understands the precarious position women hold in America.
I have written about this many times, drawing parallels to similar dynamics elsewhere. We could spend all week debating how patriarchy and tradition fuel this environment—one where women often end up being their own worst enemies—but I'm sure there are plenty of people on this subforum more qualified than I am to dissect that. What I can offer, however, is my own perspective based on observing the world around us. In reality, women in the US face discrimination that extends far beyond the domestic sphere. People love to imply it’s just a "family matter," which is usually just a convenient way for them to dodge responsibility for the state of our society, where a staggering percentage of violent crimes involve domestic abuse against women. We all make a show of worrying about starving children in Africa or fighting for LGBTQ+ rights—heaven forbid you say the wrong thing there—yet so few are willing to admit we live in a culture that still views women as inferior or less capable. As mere sexual objects. I’m not quite sure how to articulate it, and I’d welcome some help, but I find the psychological makeup required to justify such things absolutely fascinating:

Take a woman being abused by her husband: instead of the community of men and women feeling a duty to report him, they scramble to manufacture excuses for the man, while either demonizing the woman or blaming her for her own predicament.

Or consider a rape survivor. A significant portion of people will instinctively assume she was asking for it or simply making it up. Even in discussions centered on survivors, you see a lot of participants casting doubt on whether certain accounts are even credible. It’s likely why we face a reality where for every single reported rape, there are fifteen others that go completely unreported.

Ultimately, it feels like people enjoy testing their moral compasses on issues that don't directly threaten them, perhaps because they lack any real awareness of what is actually happening. Or maybe performing this brand of enlightened virtue is just a charade to make themselves feel better. Tomorrow, there will be an uproar over a Black man being beaten, but the fact that in 2010, dozens of women were murdered, raped, harassed, or discriminated against in workplaces and schools across the country is treated as an afterthought. It goes so far that people actually argue, “Well, you have to understand, it’s just domestic violence.” What is that supposed to mean? If a woman is killed by her husband, is society not responsible? Is there no systemic influence at play? Is her death somehow less significant?

The topic you brought up, which ties directly into Politics Weekly, is another perfect example, given the variety of perspectives available from both men and women.

That’s just not how it works. People who discriminate against women are the exact same crowd pushing hate against the LGBTQ+ community, Black Americans, or anyone else who doesn't fit their narrow little worldview. And honestly? There are way more of them than you'd think. Not everyone is out there shouting their bigotry from the rooftops, either—sometimes you really have to read between the lines to see what they're actually thinking. It genuinely blows my mind how many people who act all "progressive" and "chill" on the surface are actually harboring these deep-seated sexist views the second you start digging. In my entire life, I’ve literally only met two guys who didn't have some major issue with feminism: one was gay, and the other was just... fine. That's it. That's the whole list. 😁 Most people operate on this "fine, whatever" logic—like, sure, they’ll accept some things, but man, they take it way too far. The absolute worst part is when they try to play the victim by claiming they’re being oppressed by actual marginalized groups. Or they start hitting you with those tired personal credentials: "Oh, I’m a great partner to my girlfriend," or "I have plenty of gay friends, Black friends, and Mexican friends, so I can't possibly be a bigot." It’s the same script every single time. Honestly, you can count the truly tolerant people on one hand. I bet a huge chunk of this intolerance is just fueled by how messed up everything feels right now. If we actually lived in a functional society, most people would probably lose their minds over all these different groups. Then again, if we hadn't spent the last 50 years aggressively pushing for equality, the situation for women today would be a total nightmare.

The nineties basically dragged us decades back into the dark ages, and now we’re seeing this weird "traditional values" revival that somehow always translates to domestic violence or people making excuses for it. So, they finally pass one decent, sane law, and half the men in the country start screaming like they're about to be sent to a mass lynch mob. Why? Look, every single law has loopholes and can be abused—that’s just how things work—but most of these guys are just losing their minds because someone is finally trying to end the Wild West era. I mean, honestly, who actually thinks a man should be allowed to lay hands on his wife in his own house? It's insane. Even in some parts of rural America today, you still hear people telling pregnant women, "Oh, just have a son." We're still stuck in a system where inheritance flows straight into male hands, and we're being governed by a bunch of chauvinists. There are advocates for this outdated sexism on every street corner, and heaven forbid anyone dares to point it out—you'll immediately get labeled as some sort of aggressive militant just for speaking the truth.

I recently hit a wall with some truly mind-blowing news: apparently, even when you’re dealing with an "educated intellectual," you still have to sit them down and explain—step by agonizing step—that feminism isn't some grand conspiracy to enslave men or establish a New World Order where we get to settle scores for centuries of historical baggage. But hey, I failed. Naturally, I’ve been branded a man-hater. It’s funny how activists are always dismissed as just a bunch of frustrated old ladies. And honestly? The loudest critics are often the women who swear feminism has done nothing but dump a pile of crap into their lives. They act like they were better off back in the day when they could just sit around and knit all day, but now they’re expected to crochet *and* hold down a career. They completely miss the point. It’s not feminism’s fault that they’re stuck in this awkward collision between the leftover scraps of the patriarchy and a movement trying to actually make progress—all while their husbands refuse to lift a finger for housework. No, blame feminism! Or better yet: "Who does she think she is, telling me how to run my own house?!" Yeah, sure. The irony is thick. These same women wouldn't dream of burning their college diplomas or quitting their jobs, yet they love to tear down the very movements trying to expand their horizons. Then you’ve got the ones who insist that a woman's worst enemy is just another woman. It's a circus, really.

Then you’ve got the people who think feminists look down on stay-at-home moms. They completely miss the point—it was actually those very same women who fought to make sure you have the actual freedom to choose. Whether you want to be a homemaker or an architect, that choice exists because of them. Most people just don't get it. Honestly, it would be such a relief if this was just some uneducated minority, but it's definitely not. I could probably count on one hand the number of people who wouldn't absolutely lose their minds at me for saying this right now.

Steven Johnson3 said:It seems like a bunch of threads have been sparked lately, all centered around these PDFs that basically categorize women as nothing but trash. It looks like being female is being treated as the ultimate misfortune. I suppose that’s why so many people celebrate when they find out they’re having a son. Honestly, this whole mess probably traces back to Adam. But why such sweeping generalizations? Does this criticism apply to older generations, or just the younger ones? Is it meant to be universal? Should I feel ashamed simply because I am a woman? And why are feminists constantly being belittled? Would these critics actually prefer if things hadn't changed—if women were still stuck at home without any rights at all?

Could we perhaps get links to those specific discussions? Also, could you clarify who exactly would want things to remain unchanged? That final sentence was somewhat difficult to parse.

boldwalker12 said:That’s just not how it works. People who discriminate against women are the exact same crowd pushing hate against the LGBTQ+ community, Black Americans, or anyone else who doesn't fit their narrow little worldview. And honestly? There are way more of them than you'd think. Not everyone is out there shouting their bigotry from the rooftops, either—sometimes you really have to read between the lines to see what they're actually thinking. It genuinely blows my mind how many people who act all "progressive" and "chill" on the surface are actually harboring these deep-seated sexist views the second you start digging. In my entire life, I’ve literally only met two guys who didn't have some major issue with feminism: one was gay, and the other was just... fine. That's it. That's the whole list. 😁 Most people operate on this "fine, whatever" logic—like, sure, they’ll accept some things, but man, they take it way too far. The absolute worst part is when they try to play the victim by claiming they’re being oppressed by actual marginalized groups. Or they start hitting you with those tired personal credentials: "Oh, I’m a great partner to my girlfriend," or "I have plenty of gay friends, Black friends, and Mexican friends, so I can't possibly be a bigot." It’s the same script every single time. Honestly, you can count the truly tolerant people on one hand. I bet a huge chunk of this intolerance is just fueled by how messed up everything feels right now. If we actually lived in a functional society, most people would probably lose their minds over all these different groups. Then again, if we hadn't spent the last 50 years aggressively pushing for equality, the situation for women today would be a total nightmare.

The nineties basically dragged us decades back into the dark ages, and now we’re seeing this weird "traditional values" revival that somehow always translates to domestic violence or people making excuses for it. So, they finally pass one decent, sane law, and half the men in the country start screaming like they're about to be sent to a mass lynch mob. Why? Look, every single law has loopholes and can be abused—that’s just how things work—but most of these guys are just losing their minds because someone is finally trying to end the Wild West era. I mean, honestly, who actually thinks a man should be allowed to lay hands on his wife in his own house? It's insane. Even in some parts of rural America today, you still hear people telling pregnant women, "Oh, just have a son." We're still stuck in a system where inheritance flows straight into male hands, and we're being governed by a bunch of chauvinists. There are advocates for this outdated sexism on every street corner, and heaven forbid anyone dares to point it out—you'll immediately get labeled as some sort of aggressive militant just for speaking the truth.

I recently hit a wall with some truly mind-blowing news: apparently, even when you’re dealing with an "educated intellectual," you still have to sit them down and explain—step by agonizing step—that feminism isn't some grand conspiracy to enslave men or establish a New World Order where we get to settle scores for centuries of historical baggage. But hey, I failed. Naturally, I’ve been branded a man-hater. It’s funny how activists are always dismissed as just a bunch of frustrated old ladies. And honestly? The loudest critics are often the women who swear feminism has done nothing but dump a pile of crap into their lives. They act like they were better off back in the day when they could just sit around and knit all day, but now they’re expected to crochet *and* hold down a career. They completely miss the point. It’s not feminism’s fault that they’re stuck in this awkward collision between the leftover scraps of the patriarchy and a movement trying to actually make progress—all while their husbands refuse to lift a finger for housework. No, blame feminism! Or better yet: "Who does she think she is, telling me how to run my own house?!" Yeah, sure. The irony is thick. These same women wouldn't dream of burning their college diplomas or quitting their jobs, yet they love to tear down the very movements trying to expand their horizons. Then you’ve got the ones who insist that a woman's worst enemy is just another woman. It's a circus, really.

Then you’ve got the people who think feminists look down on stay-at-home moms. They completely miss the point—it was actually those very same women who fought to make sure you have the actual freedom to choose. Whether you want to be a homemaker or an architect, that choice exists because of them. Most people just don't get it. Honestly, it would be such a relief if this was just some uneducated minority, but it's definitely not. I could probably count on one hand the number of people who wouldn't absolutely lose their minds at me for saying this right now.

There are certainly moments where the exaggeration is palpable. If the titles of these threads actually reflected reality, child custody during divorces would be distributed equally between fathers and mothers. In practice, however, the default assumption remains that the child stays with the mother, even in instances where it is blatantly obvious she wouldn't be the optimal caregiver.

On a related note, do women actually pay child support in cases where custody is granted to the fathers?

boldwalker12 said:That’s just not how it works. People who discriminate against women are the exact same crowd pushing hate against the LGBTQ+ community, Black Americans, or anyone else who doesn't fit their narrow little worldview. And honestly? There are way more of them than you'd think. Not everyone is out there shouting their bigotry from the rooftops, either—sometimes you really have to read between the lines to see what they're actually thinking. It genuinely blows my mind how many people who act all "progressive" and "chill" on the surface are actually harboring these deep-seated sexist views the second you start digging. In my entire life, I’ve literally only met two guys who didn't have some major issue with feminism: one was gay, and the other was just... fine. That's it. That's the whole list. 😁 Most people operate on this "fine, whatever" logic—like, sure, they’ll accept some things, but man, they take it way too far. The absolute worst part is when they try to play the victim by claiming they’re being oppressed by actual marginalized groups. Or they start hitting you with those tired personal credentials: "Oh, I’m a great partner to my girlfriend," or "I have plenty of gay friends, Black friends, and Mexican friends, so I can't possibly be a bigot." It’s the same script every single time. Honestly, you can count the truly tolerant people on one hand. I bet a huge chunk of this intolerance is just fueled by how messed up everything feels right now. If we actually lived in a functional society, most people would probably lose their minds over all these different groups. Then again, if we hadn't spent the last 50 years aggressively pushing for equality, the situation for women today would be a total nightmare.

The nineties basically dragged us decades back into the dark ages, and now we’re seeing this weird "traditional values" revival that somehow always translates to domestic violence or people making excuses for it. So, they finally pass one decent, sane law, and half the men in the country start screaming like they're about to be sent to a mass lynch mob. Why? Look, every single law has loopholes and can be abused—that’s just how things work—but most of these guys are just losing their minds because someone is finally trying to end the Wild West era. I mean, honestly, who actually thinks a man should be allowed to lay hands on his wife in his own house? It's insane. Even in some parts of rural America today, you still hear people telling pregnant women, "Oh, just have a son." We're still stuck in a system where inheritance flows straight into male hands, and we're being governed by a bunch of chauvinists. There are advocates for this outdated sexism on every street corner, and heaven forbid anyone dares to point it out—you'll immediately get labeled as some sort of aggressive militant just for speaking the truth.

I recently hit a wall with some truly mind-blowing news: apparently, even when you’re dealing with an "educated intellectual," you still have to sit them down and explain—step by agonizing step—that feminism isn't some grand conspiracy to enslave men or establish a New World Order where we get to settle scores for centuries of historical baggage. But hey, I failed. Naturally, I’ve been branded a man-hater. It’s funny how activists are always dismissed as just a bunch of frustrated old ladies. And honestly? The loudest critics are often the women who swear feminism has done nothing but dump a pile of crap into their lives. They act like they were better off back in the day when they could just sit around and knit all day, but now they’re expected to crochet *and* hold down a career. They completely miss the point. It’s not feminism’s fault that they’re stuck in this awkward collision between the leftover scraps of the patriarchy and a movement trying to actually make progress—all while their husbands refuse to lift a finger for housework. No, blame feminism! Or better yet: "Who does she think she is, telling me how to run my own house?!" Yeah, sure. The irony is thick. These same women wouldn't dream of burning their college diplomas or quitting their jobs, yet they love to tear down the very movements trying to expand their horizons. Then you’ve got the ones who insist that a woman's worst enemy is just another woman. It's a circus, really.

Then you’ve got the people who think feminists look down on stay-at-home moms. They completely miss the point—it was actually those very same women who fought to make sure you have the actual freedom to choose. Whether you want to be a homemaker or an architect, that choice exists because of them. Most people just don't get it. Honestly, it would be such a relief if this was just some uneducated minority, but it's definitely not. I could probably count on one hand the number of people who wouldn't absolutely lose their minds at me for saying this right now.

Exactly, and that’s precisely the point I was making in my original post—they aren't being overt because they don't dare voice their actual positions; they know such views are considered unacceptable (if not out of sheer self-preservation), assuming they haven't already realized just how dangerous those attitudes can be. On the flip side, women can be discriminated against through a million different channels, whether it's via the media or in everyday life by literally everyone—including those who claim to be "fighting" discrimination, simply because nobody has been taught to recognize when certain statements or actions are problematic, let alone developed an awareness of the systemic position of women in American society. If she’s a fool, she's the one 👍to blame, right?

Bradley Taylor24 said:Could we perhaps get links to those specific discussions? Also, could you clarify who exactly would want things to remain unchanged? That final sentence was somewhat difficult to parse.

There are certainly moments where the exaggeration is palpable. If the titles of these threads actually reflected reality, child custody during divorces would be distributed equally between fathers and mothers. In practice, however, the default assumption remains that the child stays with the mother, even in instances where it is blatantly obvious she wouldn't be the optimal caregiver.

On a related note, do women actually pay child support in cases where custody is granted to the fathers?

I honestly don't see how awarding custody to mothers clashes with patriarchy. It's pretty clear that a woman's primary role—and ideally her *only* one—is motherhood. They brainwash us with those "declining birth rate" headlines just to remind us where a woman belongs, which by extension dictates where children belong. Also, it was only super recently that we started actually punishing those deadbeat dads who refuse to pay support. Generally speaking, the amounts most guys shell out for their kids are straight-up pathetic. And it's equally shameful how they treat kids from previous relationships, to the point where an ex-partner often ends up becoming an ex-parent too. Honestly, I’m genuinely shocked whenever I run into a good, dedicated father who doesn't patronize his kid or neglect them—someone who can actually change a diaper and deal with a kid screaming in the middle of the night instead of just being some decorative figure sitting in front of the TV acting like a big authority. It sounds ridiculous, but I automatically give those guys a gold star. And it's sad, because that shouldn't be a "plus"; it should be the bare minimum. There are way more irresponsible fathers than there are irresponsible mothers.

In a country that actively pushes the idea of women as housewives and mothers, talking about specific child support amounts is kind of a joke, considering most women don't even leave their husbands because they lack the financial means to do so. When women apply for jobs, they're still judged based on their plans for a private life, potential pregnancies, and so on. They’re still facing an insane amount of sexism. And all those ideas about "safe houses" or escaping? Those don't exist because those institutions are mostly useless; women could leave if they wanted to, but they can't. It's not true. They simply don't have the money. Plus, men still get hired for responsible positions most of the time; if an employer has to choose between a man and a woman with identical qualifications, they’re picking the guy every single time.
Forget child support and all that nonsense; we aren't in Sweden. Women here are lucky if they even get decent maternity leave and a chance to actually return to work.

placidmarlin3 said:Exactly, and that’s precisely the point I was making in my original post—they aren't being overt because they don't dare voice their actual positions; they know such views are considered unacceptable (if not out of sheer self-preservation), assuming they haven't already realized just how dangerous those attitudes can be. On the flip side, women can be discriminated against through a million different channels, whether it's via the media or in everyday life by literally everyone—including those who claim to be "fighting" discrimination, simply because nobody has been taught to recognize when certain statements or actions are problematic, let alone developed an awareness of the systemic position of women in American society. If she’s a fool, she's the one 👍to blame, right?

Oh, absolutely. We’ve got this endless flood of these "stars" who only made it into the spotlight because of sheer luck and their looks, yet everyone gives them all the credit—completely ignoring the disgusting, sexist mindset of a society where women basically have to choose between two roles: being a gold digger or a housewife. Anything else is just a struggle to survive. It's not guaranteed for her like it is for men. Her successes get swept under the rug. They’re always pushed to the sidelines.
It's not like someone like Ava Karabatić is inherently flawed; it’s because of all those insecure losers running the media who embarrass us daily with their garbage news. It’s easy to slip into thinking some random woman might actually be responsible for a crime when the culture is this toxic. For instance, look at how people reacted recently when some wannabe celebrity had a tragic accident—half the comments were basically "good riddance to that slut." These people don't even realize how pathetic they are, or that they’re the exact clientele fueling this kind of trashy content day in and day out.
And don't even get me started on the current trend among frustrated young guys—if a girl isn't handing herself over, she's automatically labeled a "gold digger." 😁

boldwalker12 said:I honestly don't see how awarding custody to mothers clashes with patriarchy. It's pretty clear that a woman's primary role—and ideally her *only* one—is motherhood. They brainwash us with those "declining birth rate" headlines just to remind us where a woman belongs, which by extension dictates where children belong. Also, it was only super recently that we started actually punishing those deadbeat dads who refuse to pay support. Generally speaking, the amounts most guys shell out for their kids are straight-up pathetic. And it's equally shameful how they treat kids from previous relationships, to the point where an ex-partner often ends up becoming an ex-parent too. Honestly, I’m genuinely shocked whenever I run into a good, dedicated father who doesn't patronize his kid or neglect them—someone who can actually change a diaper and deal with a kid screaming in the middle of the night instead of just being some decorative figure sitting in front of the TV acting like a big authority. It sounds ridiculous, but I automatically give those guys a gold star. And it's sad, because that shouldn't be a "plus"; it should be the bare minimum. There are way more irresponsible fathers than there are irresponsible mothers.

In a country that actively pushes the idea of women as housewives and mothers, talking about specific child support amounts is kind of a joke, considering most women don't even leave their husbands because they lack the financial means to do so. When women apply for jobs, they're still judged based on their plans for a private life, potential pregnancies, and so on. They’re still facing an insane amount of sexism. And all those ideas about "safe houses" or escaping? Those don't exist because those institutions are mostly useless; women could leave if they wanted to, but they can't. It's not true. They simply don't have the money. Plus, men still get hired for responsible positions most of the time; if an employer has to choose between a man and a woman with identical qualifications, they’re picking the guy every single time.
Forget child support and all that nonsense; we aren't in Sweden. Women here are lucky if they even get decent maternity leave and a chance to actually return to work.

Is the quoted sentence intended to be a statement or a question? 😕

The core issue here is that certain feminist organizations consistently paint fathers in a negative light, pushing for maternal custody as a default. They often do this even when it is clearly detrimental to the child's best interests.

My point is that having a noble cause doesn't grant these feminist groups immunity from making mistakes. Everyone who takes action is prone to error, whether they choose to admit it or not.

Bradley Taylor24 said:Is the quoted sentence intended to be a statement or a question? 😕

The core issue here is that certain feminist organizations consistently paint fathers in a negative light, pushing for maternal custody as a default. They often do this even when it is clearly detrimental to the child's best interests.

My point is that having a noble cause doesn't grant these feminist groups immunity from making mistakes. Everyone who takes action is prone to error, whether they choose to admit it or not.

It was a rhetorical question.
Feminist groups aren't out here painting all dads as villains; they're just pointing out facts that everyone else would rather ignore. Look, it's obvious that any institution or organization is going to make mistakes. But what does that mean? Does it mean we have to demonize them at every single turn? Because that’s exactly what happens, day in and day out. It's honestly exhausting trying to argue within that framework—like, "Oh, why don't kids get assigned to men?" Well, let me break it down for you: it's because in a patriarchal society, the stereotype is that the mom is the caregiver while the dad is the provider, the authority figure, the one who brings home the paycheck and hands out the discipline. If you follow that outdated logic, it's not hard to see why mothers end up with custody. Feminism isn't about fighting for bad moms who abuse their kids while some caring father is blocked from seeing them—that's total bullshit. And why are domestic violence shelters filled with women instead of men? That's a different conversation entirely. Why are efforts to help women who have absolutely nobody to turn to—women who are literally struggling just to survive without being terrified for their lives—constantly being sabotaged? Why do we read about murdered women every single day and just treat it like it's normal? Why do something like, what is it, 60% of high school girls think it's okay if their partner hits them? Why, why... goddammit.

boldwalker12 said:Oh, absolutely. We’ve got this endless flood of these "stars" who only made it into the spotlight because of sheer luck and their looks, yet everyone gives them all the credit—completely ignoring the disgusting, sexist mindset of a society where women basically have to choose between two roles: being a gold digger or a housewife. Anything else is just a struggle to survive. It's not guaranteed for her like it is for men. Her successes get swept under the rug. They’re always pushed to the sidelines.
It's not like someone like Ava Karabatić is inherently flawed; it’s because of all those insecure losers running the media who embarrass us daily with their garbage news. It’s easy to slip into thinking some random woman might actually be responsible for a crime when the culture is this toxic. For instance, look at how people reacted recently when some wannabe celebrity had a tragic accident—half the comments were basically "good riddance to that slut." These people don't even realize how pathetic they are, or that they’re the exact clientele fueling this kind of trashy content day in and day out.
And don't even get me started on the current trend among frustrated young guys—if a girl isn't handing herself over, she's automatically labeled a "gold digger." 😁

The blame lies squarely with both society and the media outlets that relentlessly push the image of women as nothing more than vapid objects or opportunists. They’ll argue, "But it sells papers!" I strongly disagree. If they actually chose to highlight women who have accomplished things through intellect, hard work, and genuine grit, we would see a shift in social consciousness within a generation or two. Society would actually progress by setting higher standards than just peddling raw sexuality. If we focused more on female heroes or the selfless mothers we see everywhere, the next generation of girls wouldn't look up to figures like Ava or others who manufacture overnight success by selling sex with minimal effort. Furthermore, boys wouldn't grow up idolizing a culture centered on "trophy" women or low-value archetypes; instead, they might actually seek out peers who are their equals.
The way things are now just creates a competitive environment built on incredibly shallow moral foundations.

If women are bothered by being treated like sexual objects, then maybe they could just stop acting like them.

placidmarlin3 said:The blame lies squarely with both society and the media outlets that relentlessly push the image of women as nothing more than vapid objects or opportunists. They’ll argue, "But it sells papers!" I strongly disagree. If they actually chose to highlight women who have accomplished things through intellect, hard work, and genuine grit, we would see a shift in social consciousness within a generation or two. Society would actually progress by setting higher standards than just peddling raw sexuality. If we focused more on female heroes or the selfless mothers we see everywhere, the next generation of girls wouldn't look up to figures like Ava or others who manufacture overnight success by selling sex with minimal effort. Furthermore, boys wouldn't grow up idolizing a culture centered on "trophy" women or low-value archetypes; instead, they might actually seek out peers who are their equals.
The way things are now just creates a competitive environment built on incredibly shallow moral foundations.

Exactly. And honestly, the people in power—not just here in the States, but globally (though the mix of raw tribalism and Western trash culture hits a weirdly high peak here)—absolutely love it. You’ve got moms sending their daughters to get autographs from people like Simon Gotovac. It’s impossible to open a major American news portal without being bombarded by women who haven't actually accomplished anything in their lives besides taking off their clothes. There’s this one ridiculous example of a woman who’s actually quite smart, but hey, who cares? Who gives a damn about intelligence? Intelligence is just raw material you can either use or ignore. Sure, a Playboy bunny can be smart, but that doesn't change the fact that she took the easy way out.

Women who are actually building something meaningful don't even get media coverage. In fact, for a decent woman, appearing in those kinds of outlets is basically humiliating. One of our big magazines tried to make this "cool" move by running a series of articles and calendars featuring local female authors under some bombastic headline about how women write better. They clearly didn't realize how pathetic that actually looked. It's just a million sad examples of how women, whether they want to or not, are forced to compromise and play along.

boldwalker12 said:Oh, absolutely. We’ve got this endless flood of these "stars" who only made it into the spotlight because of sheer luck and their looks, yet everyone gives them all the credit—completely ignoring the disgusting, sexist mindset of a society where women basically have to choose between two roles: being a gold digger or a housewife. Anything else is just a struggle to survive. It's not guaranteed for her like it is for men. Her successes get swept under the rug. They’re always pushed to the sidelines.
It's not like someone like Ava Karabatić is inherently flawed; it’s because of all those insecure losers running the media who embarrass us daily with their garbage news. It’s easy to slip into thinking some random woman might actually be responsible for a crime when the culture is this toxic. For instance, look at how people reacted recently when some wannabe celebrity had a tragic accident—half the comments were basically "good riddance to that slut." These people don't even realize how pathetic they are, or that they’re the exact clientele fueling this kind of trashy content day in and day out.
And don't even get me started on the current trend among frustrated young guys—if a girl isn't handing herself over, she's automatically labeled a "gold digger." 😁

Sure, there are successful women out there, but it’s certainly easier to shake your ass than to roll up your sleeves. So, everyone shifts the blame away from the ones who chose the easy route.

I remember watching this woman on some show once— there was that woman recently on the news who acts as a right hand to the CEO of a major corporation, we have a female President, and plenty of female athletes. But how many anonymous women chose a career over being a socialite or a housewife? Not everyone lands a glamorous, high-paying gig, but by that logic, not every man is a CEO of a multinational corporation making millions. I'll give you some real examples from my life. Two teachers from my high school—incredible women who taught me far more than just the curriculum. Then two professors at my university who were so brilliant I actually showed up to class. Could those women have chosen a different path? Sure. They could have, but they didn't. Everything is a choice—it's just easier to claim there was no option and blame it all on some group of men.

The whole situation surrounding feminism is quite interesting to me. While, in theory, feminism should advocate for true equality between men and women—which is a goal I support wholeheartedly—I can't help but feel that certain public figures who identify as feminists actually seem to be striving for inequality, specifically to favor women.

And I suppose inequality is fundamentally wrong.

For instance, the Catholic Church (as well as several other religious institutions) is frequently criticized for promoting gender inequality. However, one of the few non-religious educational programs in the US that actually practices gender discrimination during enrollment is "Women's studies." Essentially, a man is not permitted to enroll in "Women's studies."
So, rather than working to dismantle sexual discrimination, "Women's studies" actively perpetuates it.

I think this serves as a clear example of hypocrisy, suggesting that this isn't really about a "fight for equality," but is perhaps more about a struggle for as much power as possible.

boldwalker12 said:It was a rhetorical question.
Feminist groups aren't out here painting all dads as villains; they're just pointing out facts that everyone else would rather ignore. Look, it's obvious that any institution or organization is going to make mistakes. But what does that mean? Does it mean we have to demonize them at every single turn? Because that’s exactly what happens, day in and day out. It's honestly exhausting trying to argue within that framework—like, "Oh, why don't kids get assigned to men?" Well, let me break it down for you: it's because in a patriarchal society, the stereotype is that the mom is the caregiver while the dad is the provider, the authority figure, the one who brings home the paycheck and hands out the discipline. If you follow that outdated logic, it's not hard to see why mothers end up with custody. Feminism isn't about fighting for bad moms who abuse their kids while some caring father is blocked from seeing them—that's total bullshit. And why are domestic violence shelters filled with women instead of men? That's a different conversation entirely. Why are efforts to help women who have absolutely nobody to turn to—women who are literally struggling just to survive without being terrified for their lives—constantly being sabotaged? Why do we read about murdered women every single day and just treat it like it's normal? Why do something like, what is it, 60% of high school girls think it's okay if their partner hits them? Why, why... goddammit.

It’s because they lack any semblance of common sense—you can't blame some guy for that. Honestly, they don't seem to care one bit. Then, when they actually run into a decent guy, he isn't "exciting" enough because he isn't a bad boy. So, they go looking for the bad boy who will slowly bruise them just to show who's boss in the relationship. They crave it—and really, who are we to judge?

boldwalker12 said:It was a rhetorical question.
Feminist groups aren't out here painting all dads as villains; they're just pointing out facts that everyone else would rather ignore. Look, it's obvious that any institution or organization is going to make mistakes. But what does that mean? Does it mean we have to demonize them at every single turn? Because that’s exactly what happens, day in and day out. It's honestly exhausting trying to argue within that framework—like, "Oh, why don't kids get assigned to men?" Well, let me break it down for you: it's because in a patriarchal society, the stereotype is that the mom is the caregiver while the dad is the provider, the authority figure, the one who brings home the paycheck and hands out the discipline. If you follow that outdated logic, it's not hard to see why mothers end up with custody. Feminism isn't about fighting for bad moms who abuse their kids while some caring father is blocked from seeing them—that's total bullshit. And why are domestic violence shelters filled with women instead of men? That's a different conversation entirely. Why are efforts to help women who have absolutely nobody to turn to—women who are literally struggling just to survive without being terrified for their lives—constantly being sabotaged? Why do we read about murdered women every single day and just treat it like it's normal? Why do something like, what is it, 60% of high school girls think it's okay if their partner hits them? Why, why... goddammit.

Should those very same organizations be spending their time demonizing the entire male gender every single day?🤷

Andrew Mendoza10 said:I’m just wondering about one thing—why on earth do these women marry men like this? It’s hard to wrap my head around the idea that they didn't get a clear picture of who he was during the dating phase. If I weren't living in the States—if I were looking at these posts from somewhere else—I’d honestly think women were treated worse here than in some fundamentalist countries. I truly don't know a single soul who views women as inferior beings.

👍

Anyway, I’ve already lost track in this massive sea of comments, but I did catch someone rambling about "male lineage" and how having a son is somehow better than having a daughter... lol, what a bunch of hillbillies...
Who gives a damn about lineage? If it were up to me, I wouldn't step foot back in my childhood home ever again. To hell with "legacy" and ancestors—honestly, screw my ancestors and screw my old man too...
Smart people don't obsess over that kind of nonsense... regardless of gender.

Ryan Wood98 said:The whole situation surrounding feminism is quite interesting to me. While, in theory, feminism should advocate for true equality between men and women—which is a goal I support wholeheartedly—I can't help but feel that certain public figures who identify as feminists actually seem to be striving for inequality, specifically to favor women.

And I suppose inequality is fundamentally wrong.

For instance, the Catholic Church (as well as several other religious institutions) is frequently criticized for promoting gender inequality. However, one of the few non-religious educational programs in the US that actually practices gender discrimination during enrollment is "Women's studies." Essentially, a man is not permitted to enroll in "Women's studies."
So, rather than working to dismantle sexual discrimination, "Women's studies" actively perpetuates it.

I think this serves as a clear example of hypocrisy, suggesting that this isn't really about a "fight for equality," but is perhaps more about a struggle for as much power as possible.

Look, the hunger, or the drive 😁 for power is just part of being human. There isn't a single ideology out there that hasn't been twisted by it at some point. Personally, I see it like this: I don't pretend to be equal to everyone, I don't identify with everyone, and I'm definitely not "brothering" anyone based on sex or ideology. It doesn't even cross my mind to view every woman claiming to be a feminist as my "sister" in some shallow, mindless way, nor am I buying into those militant factions. But... a good chunk of what they're trying to achieve actually aligns with my worldview, and I think there are still a ton of inequalities out there that need fixing. We shouldn't just demonize their goals.
The Church is notorious for its divisions, but I don't find that particularly surprising. I know it's a pretty cliché example, but when the clergy is exclusively male, there really isn't much of a debate to be had there.

boldwalker12 said:Look, the hunger, or the drive 😁 for power is just part of being human. There isn't a single ideology out there that hasn't been twisted by it at some point. Personally, I see it like this: I don't pretend to be equal to everyone, I don't identify with everyone, and I'm definitely not "brothering" anyone based on sex or ideology. It doesn't even cross my mind to view every woman claiming to be a feminist as my "sister" in some shallow, mindless way, nor am I buying into those militant factions. But... a good chunk of what they're trying to achieve actually aligns with my worldview, and I think there are still a ton of inequalities out there that need fixing. We shouldn't just demonize their goals.
The Church is notorious for its divisions, but I don't find that particularly surprising. I know it's a pretty cliché example, but when the clergy is exclusively male, there really isn't much of a debate to be had there.

I might be mistaken, but I'm fairly sure that in the USA, some denominations actually allow women to be ordained as priests.

Bradley Taylor24 said:Should those very same organizations be spending their time demonizing the entire male gender every single day?🤷

Come on, don't be like that—give me something actual to work with! Lay some specifics on me so I can actually dig in.

Andrew Mendoza10 said:I might be mistaken, but I'm fairly sure that in the USA, some denominations actually allow women to be ordained as priests.

Yeah, I think so, though you won't find that happening in the Catholic Church. Honestly, I don't have a huge dog in this fight when it comes to how things work in the States, but hey, good for them.

boldwalker12 said:Look, the hunger, or the drive 😁 for power is just part of being human. There isn't a single ideology out there that hasn't been twisted by it at some point. Personally, I see it like this: I don't pretend to be equal to everyone, I don't identify with everyone, and I'm definitely not "brothering" anyone based on sex or ideology. It doesn't even cross my mind to view every woman claiming to be a feminist as my "sister" in some shallow, mindless way, nor am I buying into those militant factions. But... a good chunk of what they're trying to achieve actually aligns with my worldview, and I think there are still a ton of inequalities out there that need fixing. We shouldn't just demonize their goals.
The Church is notorious for its divisions, but I don't find that particularly surprising. I know it's a pretty cliché example, but when the clergy is exclusively male, there really isn't much of a debate to be had there.

That makes sense, though with the Church, it isn't really a question—everyone knows they can be quite closed-minded and regressive.

I wonder, is it possible for American feminists to advocate for equality while simultaneously practicing discrimination?