i can actually draw parallels between the nazi and feminist thought proccess.
Well yeah, you can, but you really shouldn’t, considering the fact that they’re nothing alike and you’re comparison only acts to trivialize the atrocities…
1 i dont give a fuck what you think i should or shouldnt draw paralells about.
im not looking for your fucking permission.
drawing a paralell between thought processes does not decrese the significance of ww2 because nazis didnt just exist in ww2 theyre still around today.
Actually, that’s a very good point. One of your only ones in this post, but it is a good point. I accidentally pushed the existence of nazis into people that only existed in the past, but yes, they do still exist. And yes, you are still trivializing them by comparing them to feminists.
2 the lies and brainwashing are things like patriarchy theory(doesnt exist in first world countries like america)
and the wage gap. both of which have been proven wrong on multiple occasions.
If they have, you certainly haven’t provided that info. Am I supposed to accept that based on the value of your word alone?
3 if you honestly thing feminism is good pure and doesnt hurt anybody then chew on this
Oh, boy. You know that any rant that begins with “chew on this” is going to be good.
Feminists fight to hurt men (not just radical feminists either) (this info is fromoratorasaurus)
Well, at least you admit that all you’re about to do is a giant copy-and-paste.
Father’s rights group want shared parenting (equal custody) to be the default if both parents want custody and neither parent is unfit. They feel that men should not be punished for being men, and that women should not be awarded custody to their kids simply for being women. Currently women are awarded primary custody almost all the time, even if the husband was the stay-at-home Dad and the woman was the breadwinner.
You see, your statistic is true if we look at the results of all divorce cases. But, in many divorce cases, both parents don’t actively seek custody. So what happens if we only look at the cases in which they do?
Let’s look at this study that examines just that issue. I recommend reading through, but I’ll summarize its results for you:
"Study 1: MASS
2100 cases where fathers sought custody (100%)
5 year duration
29% of fathers got primary custody
65% of fathers got joint custody
7% of mothers got primary custody
Study 2: MASS
700 cases. In 57, (8.14%) father sought custody
67% of fathers got primary custody
23% of mothers got primary custody
Study 3: MASS
500 cases. In 8% of these cases, father sought custody
41% of fathers got sole custody
38% of fathers got joint custody
15% of mothers got sole custody
Study 4: Los Angeles
63% of fathers who sought sole custody were successful
Study 5: US appellate custody cases
51% of fathers who sought custody were successful (not clear from wording whether this includes just sole or sole/joint custody)
The study concluded:
"The high success rate of fathers does not by itself establish gender bias against women. Additional evidence, however, indicates that women may be less able to afford the lawyers and experts needed in contested custody cases (see “Family Law Overview”) and that, in contested cases, different and stricter standards are applied to mothers."
So that point seems kind of moot.
Feminists fought against this. You can read NOW’s own statement here. Also note their usage of anti-male lies, i.e. “fathers are abusive, don’t give them custody.” That is from 1997, but still remains valid today.
Actually, I see NOW making some pretty good points. The Michigan Law DID assume that both parents were equally involved in the child’s life before the separation. It did make the assumption that what was best for the child was necessarily joint custody.
Also, I saw nothing even similar to “fathers are abusive, don’t give them custody” in that link.
Men want protection against false rape allegations. They feel that a man’s life should not be ruined simply on the allegation of a woman who may be a vindictive liar. Currently, a woman can accuse a man of rape for no reason, and the man’s name is splashed in the paper and his life is ruined. So, they fought for laws granting men anonymity until charged with the crime of rape—not convicted, just charged.
Feminists fought against this, causing it to fail.
Also see here, the London Feminist Network campaigning to defeat the proposal.
Are you actually reading their reasoning? As they state in the very link you provided,
"Extending anonymity to rape defendants, as distinct from those accused of any other crime, sends out the misleading message that false allegations of rape are common. In fact there is absolutely no reliable evidence to support the claim that false allegations of rape are any more frequent than false allegations of any other crime. Rape defendants are currently treated in law, and rightly so, in the same way as those accused of other violent crimes. Many rapists are repeat offenders and so publicity around these cases directly increases the likelihood of other victims and witnesses coming forward."
You should read the whole letter, as this is just one of many reasons that you didn’t even bother trying to refute. At least acknowledge your opposition’s points and respond to them.
“The London Feminist Network is a campaigning organisation uniting London based feminist groups and individuals in activism.”
Men want an end to the justice system favouring women simply because they are women, and giving men harsher sentences simply because they are men.
Feminists fought against this, arguing that no woman should be sent to jail, even women who had murdered multiple people.
We agree that this is ridiculous, but it’s disingenuous of you to claim that “feminists” did this. A fringe task force is attempting these goals. Do you have any kind of evidence suggesting that it has the support of feminists as a homogeneous group?
I’m done arguing against your Gish Gallop of copy and pasted claims, research that you didn’t even put together yourself. I hope that, by now, you can see how dishonest the points that you’re presenting are.
Blah blah blah… ignores the fact that people are drawing a comparison between the *thought process* of nazis and feminists.
Nazis did not start out murdering Jews… but say it again with me motherfucker… the THOUGHT PROCESS THAT LEAD THEM TO THAT POINT was inherent to the movement. The same thought process that informs Feminism.
The sense of victimization… the cult like following… the demand for a pound of flesh regardless of who you’re carving it off from… these are hallmarks of both feminism and Nazism.
Try this… no, seriously.. think about it because you seem to masturbate to the concept of False Rape Allegations being few and far between.
Next time you write a forty five fucking page long response try bothering to actually say something in that response… other than bullshit Feminist nonsense.