• Member Since 28th Oct, 2012
  • online

Pineta


Particle Physics and Pony Fiction Experimentalist

More Blog Posts364

Sep
22nd
2014

Men against gender inequality · 9:02pm Sep 22nd, 2014

I just picked this up on Lauren Faust's Twitter stream. This is surely something bronies can get behind.

"All over the world, men are taking a stand for gender equality." Will you be one of them?

http://www.heforshe.org/

Report Pineta · 553 views · #he for she #feminism #faust
Join our Patreon to remove these adverts!
Comments ( 15 )

I certainly support the movement, but looking at that YouTube video, all I can think is that there's a fanfiction plot in there about Hermione addressing the UN.

Yeah, my mind goes weird places sometimes. :twilightsheepish:

She comments that many ponies are of the opinion that Feminists are StallionHaters. This is the fault of the GenderFeminsts, or as they are more colloquially known, the BallBashers:


Femism started as a movement for equality between mares and stallions. The genderfeminsists are a bunch of extremists believing that all stallions are evil suppressors and rapists. The greatest accoplishment of the genderfeminists was the sinking of the Equal Rights Amendment:

It takes ¾ of the states to amend the US-Constitution (other ways exist, but we talk about the path of the Equal Rights Amendment). At 1st, states signed on rapidly, but with the extremism of the genderfeminists in the news, states stopped calling for the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment and states rescinded their support. Then genderfeminists stole defeat from the jaws of victory:

At its peak, 35 of the 38 states needed to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment ratified it, but the shenanigans of the genderfeminists caused ratification to stall and 5 states to withdraw support.

The majority of feminists, many of whom are stallions, who support Equality between stallions and mares started calling themselves EquityFeminists for distinguishing themselves from genderfeminists. The EquityFeminist Christina Hoff Sommers documents the emergence of genderfeminism in the 1960s and its growth in the 1970s, when it killed the Equal Rights Amendment in her 1994-Book, “¿Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women”. The subtitle of the book is a reference to how with female genderfeminists in Feminism derailing everything, ¿who need male misogynous pigs?

2475186

The genderfeminsists are a bunch of extremists believing that all stallions are evil suppressors and rapists.

I am a gender feminist, and I do not believe that.

Back in my day women were happy to vote. It's for things like that that I want a Granny Smith/Luna emote.
But seriously, all this talk about inequality and SJWs and WMDs (:applejackconfused:wait that's not right...) all I have to say is give it a rest for like five years. We don't need anymore stuff clogging up the various systems as is. I don't consider myself an expert on world politics, but I'm pretty sure there's more important stuff to be worrying about than whether or not you're getting paid less than your against-all-odds-same-qualifications-co-worker, among other bull honkey.
:trixieshiftright:To be blunt, I'm all for it, but I don't think we should be getting this worked up about stuff like this until people decide to lower their willingness to start killing people over what someone else's government is doing.

"Why has the word, become such an uncomfortable one?"

Apparently she didn't really do her research or refuses to acknowledge the neo-scum that drag the feminist theory of TRUE equality for woman AND men, because during those words of associating herself as being too aggresive or whatever, it comes off as she's defending those tumblr-nazis that are WOMEN ONLY and don't actually care to 'debate' shit if it isn't 100% their way.

Still watching, but dear god if she needs to really remove the blindfolds and start seeing what these wannabe fems, neo-fems, are doing with the whole 'feminist' movement. Because so far it seems like Lauren is the only sane feminist left along with this one Youtube mom I forgot the link to.

Anyhow, gonna continue watching. But damn if she doesn't sound ignorant of all the bad teens and young adults harrassing and abusing the feminist word with their own agendas that have little to nothing to do with talking and all about forcing others to comply with their often times ludicrous demands.


EDIT:
Abortion:
Now those are some good points. No man should have the right to tell a woman if she can or cannot abort a child where the father has no want or interest to be with the woman. Or where the woman is ill equipped to afford a child due to career path such as wanting to further their education and so forth. Though I believe outside of rape a woman is solely responsible for whether she gets pregnant or not, if they want to murder their unborn for being irresponsible and neither parent wants the child, that is still their natural right to bear whether they wish to carry or not.

Making laws that cause young teens to go into alleys or public restsrooms to abort an unwanted child is disgusting and unsanitary. It still happens today. And laws banning and putting timers on when they can abort is inhumane. One, being forced to bring a life into a world where they are unwanted. Two, for clogging up an already huge system of said unwanted children still looking for a permanent home. And 3, it's their fucking body and they should be judge jury and executioner of their unborn child. Regardless of how many months in the womb. Though cruel, it's their life.


Jobs:
If she's pulling her own weight, not fucking the boss after hours, and is deserving of the job she has, she damn well better be getting paid equal amounts. Men should also have 100% EQUAL CHANCES at jobs where men prefer to hire women. Mainly super markets as cashiers and so forth. I've literally been told by the manager of a store that he only hires young women because they attract more business. Fuck the fact most of those brats live with their parents and don't NEED the given job.

Yeah, I'm down for EQUAL rights on both sides of the fence. Based on what is required to DO the jobs you'd be assigned and not based on who has more college years or bigger family income. Or better curves and pretty face.

2475368

> “The genderfeminsists are a bunch of extremists believing that all stallions are evil suppressors and rapists.”

> “I am a gender feminist, and I do not believe that.”

Then, ¿why do not you become an EquityFeminist? Despite what your doctrine says, stallions are not your enemies. Most stallions do not want to keep mares down. Many stallions want equal rights for mares and stallions. I am 1 of those stallions I am an EquityFeminists and I am a stallion. The whole concept of HeForShe is stallions and mares working together for equality. It is certainly more productive:

The EquityFeminists back when they were just Feminists got the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) rolling. Then the GenderFeminists arose. They kicked stallions out of the movement and declared that all stallions are the enemy. By this time, ERA had 35 of the necessary 38 States for ratification.

The antics of the BallBashers caused ERA to loose support. Politicians withdrew support for ERA because they did not want to be associated with the BallBashers. States withdrew support for ERA —— ¡many states unratified ERA! ¡GenderFeminists stole defeat from the jaws of victory! ¡Misogynist pigs consider GenderFeminists the best thing since the ChastityBelt!

You should decide whether you want to alienate all stallions and most mares while accomplishing nothing or would like to work with both stallions and mares and accomplish much.

2475511

Then, ¿why do not you become an EquityFeminists?

Why would I? True equality between men and women can't be attained with legal reforms alone, though those are important stepping stones. Biases need to be eradicated, and cultural superstitions need to be debunked. That can't be done with government power, not unless you want a totalitarian dictatorship.

Despite what your doctrine says, stallions are not your enemies.

I literally just said that I don't believe that men are evil. Why are you trying to convince me of something I already believe?

The antics of the BallBashers caused ERA to loose support. Politicians withdrew support for ERA because they did not want to be associated with the BallBashers.

Wait a second. The main campaign against the ERA was STOP ERA, spearheaded by Phyllis Schlafly, and the main arguments she used against the ERA were not "ew, ball busting gender feminists!", but were more along the lines of "if this passes, we'll have to draft women and build unisex bathrooms, and widows will no longer receive Social Security." If you're blaming gender feminism for these arguments gaining traction, then you need to substantiate your claims better. Show me, don't tell me.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=p-iFl4qhBsE#t=480
That's what I'm talking about. This woman understands equality. Men are prisoners of distorted sense of male success.


EDIT: Well, that was a beautiful speech. That's certainly something to stand behind. And they even managed to come up with a new word that isn't so exclusive to carry on the ideas of what Feminism was meant to be known for and finally be more inclusive to all genders and people and creed.

He for She/She for He. Let's do this!

2475652

>> Walabio

Then, ¿why do not you become an EquityFeminists?

Why would I? True equality between men and women can't be attained with legal reforms alone, though those are important stepping stones. Biases need to be eradicated, and cultural superstitions need to be debunked. That can't be done with government power, not unless you want a totalitarian dictatorship.

If you cannot accomplish your goals by legal equality, education, registering you and your friends to vote, and running for public office, then, ¿how do you achieve your goals?

Despite what your doctrine says, stallions are not your enemies.

I literally just said that I don't believe that men are evil. Why are you trying to convince me of something I already believe?

If you believe that stallions are not your enemy, then, ¿why are you a GenderFeminist?

The antics of the BallBashers caused ERA to loose support. Politicians withdrew support for ERA because they did not want to be associated with the BallBashers.

Wait a second. The main campaign against the ERA was STOP ERA, spearheaded by Phyllis Schlafly, and the main arguments she used against the ERA were not "ew, ball busting gender feminists!", but were more along the lines of "if this passes, we'll have to draft women and build unisex bathrooms, and widows will no longer receive Social Security." If you're blaming gender feminism for these arguments gaining traction, then you need to substantiate your claims better. Show me, don't tell me.

That traitor to all women makes a great escapegoat (no offense meant to goats) and she certainly did not help, but the ERA receive opposition from the beginning, but it was not until GenderFeminists dominated it supporters that new states stopped ratifying and old states started unratifying. Let me use an hypothetical example:

Postwar CivilRightsMovement had racist detractors from the beginning. let us look at our world in the 1960s and an hypothetical other world in the 1960s:

Many groups and many leaders existed in the 1950s, since the late 1950s going into the 1960s, the foremost leader was Reverend Martin Luther King. in the 1960s, President Kennedy signed a Civil Rights Act. President Johnson also signed a Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act which the Supreme Court just gutted. That was in our timeline.

Suppose that in 1960 Reverend Martin Luther King would resign. His replacement would be a racists ranting and raving about how all crackers are evil and demanding that all honkies pay 10,00.00 U$D apiece to negroes in reparations. ¿Do you believe that the Civil and Voting Rights Acts which became law in our timeline would become law in the alternative timeline?

No, see, the title says "against gender inequality", but the website is called "heforshe". That's not even paying lip service to equality.

2475503

I don't think we should be getting this worked up about stuff like this until people decide to lower their willingness to start killing people over what someone else's government is doing.

Well, you could use that argument at any point in history to argue against doing anything. :ajsmug:

2475789 Yeah, I have to go with emphasizing this.

We don't have equality between men, and none of the feminist movements and their offshoots really address that. Or even try to deal with it.

Try to be a male victim of female abuse some time. Somehow feminism or "He for She" doesn't make me all warm and fuzzy.

Edit: A followup -- essentially, the argument is always about how we need to stop violence against women while men need to be allowed to and be recognized for getting in touch with their feminine side. Yeah, that's not really that big of a problem. Plenty of guys are in touch with their feminine side, and wouldn't raise a hand against women.

For me? Why do I have this attitude? Is it something that just came to me when I had to tell my mom recently that hitting me was not acceptable as a response to a lame joke, while I was one of the only people that came to help her when her behavior had already made almost everyone else abandon her? Well, no. I've been developing this idea for a while. Male and female relations are imbalanced. And finding balance is important. But it won't fix anything by just addressing one part.

You can't right a very wobbly cabinet by adjusting only one leg.

Many of these observations are of course for the West. Not all of them are applicable in other parts of the world. But even there, talking about trying to build equality for women while ignoring the even greater inequality between men is going to doom the efforts from the start.

2475503
I'm sorry to clog up your feed with all this unimportant stuff. I will return to the far more serious issue of cute stories about toy ponies in future posts.
2475789
This is a UN campaign, backed by many high profile men and women, asking men to take a stand against violence and discrimination faced by women and girls.
You can't support that? You really are bad Horse.

2476691

This is a UN campaign, backed by many high profile men and women, asking men to take a stand against violence and discrimination faced by women and girls.
You can't support that? You really are bad Horse.

But what does that mean? I scrolled down and down and down, past flashing bright colors and backgrounds moving in different directions as I tried to figure out what was about. But there was nothing explaining what it's about except one sentence, "I commit to take action against all forms of violence and discrimination faced by women and girls." And a big black button to click saying, "I agree".

I don't commit to take action against all forms of violence and discrimination faced by women and girls. Want to end violence against women? Great. Count me in. But opposing all forms of discrimination faced by women and girls... we've seen where that leads, and it isn't to gender equality. Eventually you have to weigh one form of discrimination against another. Framing your action as "ending discrimination against women" guarantees you must implement some discrimination against men.

For instance, MIT always admits as many women as men into each freshman class. Yet many times more men than women apply to MIT, with the result that it's much easier for a woman to get into MIT than for a man. Is that ending discrimination, or creating more discrimination? What about places that teach psychology and have classes that are 90% female? What should they do?

But I wouldn't click on that big black button regardless. There's no hint as to what happens if you click on it. Does it take you to another, equally-uninformative webpage? Does it add your click to a counter somewhere whose total will be read aloud in a sanctimonious voice at a UN assembly? "As you see, Mr. Secretary, one hundred million people support gender equality, which is why all international flights must have at least one woman pilot."

So what happens if I click on the button?
Just click on it!
Okay, but does clicking get counted as agreeing to some statement I don't get to see until I click on it?
Click it!
Yeah, but does clicking--
Click it, click it good!
but---
Less talking, more clicking!
sigh.

When somebody makes you scroll through several pages of fancy artwork and graphic design on their web page without telling you who they are, what they are trying to do, or what they want you to do, either they're trying to con you, or they're themselves incapable of or uninterested in logical thought.

Login or register to comment
Join our Patreon to remove these adverts!