Over on Reddit, DoktorTeufel has a problem: he likes the ladies, but he doesn’t like the feminists. Unfortunately, some ladies are also feminists! And therein lies the danger. Naturally, he turns to the fellas in the Men’s Rights subreddit for help.
I’m just going to come out and say it: I will never knowingly enter into a romantic relationship with a feminist. I do have some female relatives and acquaintances who are feminists … and it’s not like they all wear signs that proclaim I’M A FEMINIST. (Some do.)
Aside from obvious telltales (feminist bumper stickers, etc.) or outright asking them “Are you a feminist?”, what are some discreet ways to ferret out a woman’s views on gender activism without creating an awkward situation? Feminism is a minefield topic, and I certainly wouldn’t broach the subject directly with a woman I’ve just started dating.
Naturally, this being the Men’s Rights subreddit, he received much helpful advice. Celda broke it down for him:
You don’t really care whether she identifies as a feminist or not – you care what her views are.
For instance, does she feel women have the right to force men into parental obligations against their will?
Does she feel women are oppressed in Western society?
Does she think that women make less money than men for the same work?
If yes to these questions or similar, then you probably want to avoid her.
Exactly. Always avoid those with a basic grasp on reality. They’re the worst!
Naive1000 suggested looking for more subtle clues.
Ask their thoughts on “benevolent sexism” if they know what your talking about you likely have a feminist. Just to make sure go into male privilege, it’s the feminists’ most popular talking point. Let her talk about it then you can see what she’s really like. But, there are some women who call themselves feminists, but are really egalitarian: they just don’t know the term.
Memymineown also suggests a subtle approach, and holds out hope that some of the younger feminist girls can be won back to the path of righteousness:
Bring Men’s Rights issues into the conversation subtly. I was talking with my family about Justin Beiber and brought up the paternity charge and no rape charges filed against the woman.
That led into a discussion about how women aren’t punished for rape.
Just do things like that.
But you shouldn’t exclude all feminists. I would say that the vast majority are just girls(I do use that word on purpose) who have been lied to. Once you show them the real facts they will probably come around.
ThePigman, by contrast, urges DoktorTeufel to go for the jugular:
Why do you need to be discrete about it? Just ask her. If she is a member of the cult she will start screaming about the patriarchy, then her head will explode.
It’s true. Pretty much every conversation involving feminists quickly devolves into screaming about patriarchy. Heck, a feminist friend and I once screamed about patriarchy for five hours straight. We probably could have gone longer, but the manager at Applebee’s, evidently not a feminist, threw us out. Sometimes I start screaming about patriarchy when no one else is around, just to keep in practice.
Conversations with feminists pretty much all go like the conversation in the video below, only instead of a cat you need to picture a feminist, and instead of the word “no,” the word “patriarchy.” You can see how annoying that might get, and not just to Hitler.
And here is where we hit the “your numbers were imaginary in the first place” wall.
You have no reasoning to suggest that we’ll all be making megamoney in the Glorious Future. (Except for your “government money is all set on fire, so all that money will go to the people instead!” logic, which people have repeatedly addressed.)
Losing taxes means we lose all the jobs taxes create and all the infrastructure for business that’s paid for with tax money. Whether other government systems can make up for that or not is debateable, but it’s not as simple as “I pay 10K in taxes, so without taxes I’ll be 10K richer, Q. E. D.”
(Also I have a sneaking suspicion that you’re counting your tax withholdings as taxes, but I’m not your accountant so I won’t get into that…)
Ah, I see now. Gracias – I think there’s a lot of very good anarchist literature on info distribution and open-source regulatory models that’s developing in this area, and I note that PERSONAL HERO Kevin Carson is working on a book called “The Desktop Regulatory State” that promises to break down and lay out a lot of the best work. Basically, with current technology, and emerging technology, it becomes much, much easier for us to cloudsource that knowledge, if that makes any sense?
So the need for a state, if any, to surmount that problem may fade, if not disappear, if it already hasn’t, by the ability to compile a lot of imperfect knowledge.
*hic*
@Pecunium
Your math sucks.
Cook $150.00 a day x 7 = $1050.00 a week
Cleaning $400.00 a week.
I don’t have kids so it’ll be $1450.00 a week
$1450 x 52 = $75,400.00 a year.
I’d of course have to supply the food for the cooking.
I just can’t see myself being able to afford a woman. Would sex be included in this price? I could possibly afford a woman 1 week a year, but only if sex was included in her price.
So even though I only made around 50K last year I really made $125,400.00 since I do all these things for myself.
So what are you saying here? That women should do all this for free? Just because they’re women and they were born to the task?
I know you’re allergic to saying what you actually believe (always the mark of a brave, strong intellectual hero), but without you spelling that out, it’s confusing.
Would you be generous enough to include room and board, or does she have to pay rent too?
@Holly Pervocracy
The government only creates debt.
Under the original constitution it didn’t create debt for the people. Under the “new constitution” it does.
Please refer to our founding fathers for clarification.
I’ll say this for DKM: his plans may be atrocious, but at least he lays them out. He puts that “Houses of Entertainment” shit right on the table.
NWO just sulks and simpers about how you wouldn’t appreciate his Houses of Entertainment anyway so why does he even bother (yet he keeps bothering).
oh dear
Yes, the government is in debt; yes, this is bad; no, this does not mean that tax money disappears. The government spends and a lot of that spending (not enough, but a lot) does directly benefit citizens.
So…NWO doesn’t understand history, economics, science, English punctuation, debate, or math, and he has no reading comprehension.
What’s left?
Slavey’s underlying assumption seems to be that women should provide men with services for free, just because.
This is rather ironic given his chosen screename.
So even though I only made around 50K last year I really made $125,400.00 since I do all these things for myself.
…
The sad thing is that you’re starting to “get it”, dumb-nuts. You have value. Value that you should be able to use to thumb the nose at your employers, say FUCK IT, and be able to use to support yourself. And that inherent value, that ability to not have to go bowing and scraping for your bread and board and booze, should be pressure that you should be able to bear with the force of a fucking anvil on people looking to hire.
But, you know, blame the welfare.
NWO: Lets see. Barely enough to sustain myself on social security, or an extra 5 or 600K by the time I retire. Well that’s a toughie! I’ll take the 600K. I’m just silly that way.
But… history tells us that didn’t happen. Where were all the people living comfortable retirements in the past? Or do you think people were stripped of their easy elder years to a life of penurious penny pinching once Social Security came to be.
That same Social Security Eisenhower said no one in their right minds would dream of taking away. The social security that, because it relieved people of the need to support their elder parents, they were able to send their kids to school. The world today is as prosperous as it is because of the social safety net you deny provides you all the services I mentioned before, and more besides.
MUSIC THEORY! OMG! THIS IS AN UNEXPLORED REALM OF POTENTIAL RICHES!
How do we best tap this new vein?
CassandraSays – But if women provide men with services for free, we’re still enjoying the cushy homelife and leaving men to do the dangerous jobs!
I’m not really sure what we’re supposed to do now. I guess work all day (but only at the jobs men didn’t want), pay for the kid’s private childcare, then come home and cook and clean. And as long as taxes are abolished we’ll all have enough money to make this work out just fine.
@Holly Pervocracy
I do all these things for free now. If I have a woman over and we have dinner, I clean the kitchen. If I don’t have a woman over I still eat dinner and I still clean the kitchen.
Under the feminist dictionary of how much a woman is worth for being at home doing the things I do for myself for free, I can’t afford a woman.
I’ll go with the original cheaper version of 60K a year with no kids. I’d need to pay a woman 60K. I can never afford to have a woman sleep in my home that I paid for. Tack on say 30K to pay my bills and survive I’d need 90K a year to have a woman live with me. Not gonna happen. She would be twice as wealthy as me.
If you made 90K a year would you hand over 60K of it to have a man live with you?
But Pecunium, we all know Ike was just a pawn of the military industrial complex…
I’m rather curious as to how he explains why women who already have jobs outside the home should still provide those services to their husbands free of charge, given that most women in the US are in fact employed.
Holly – And he doesn’t want taxes abolished, he admitted this. He wants THE INCOME TAX abolished, that’s it. Excise taxes, estate taxes – well, there’s a chance he’s heard THOSE are bad *ahem* , property taxes, he LOVES taxes, he just won’t let them be taken out of the paycheck he sees, directly.
(and no, NWO, I am not for the income tax, or any other tax, but again, you are not making any fucking sense)
Since I’m such an egalitarian. I’ll cook and clean for any woman here. I’ll even give sex on demand and be happy about it. I’ll always be cheerful. All it’ll take is 60K a year. Hell, I’ll even memorize feminist doctrine and sing in verse for ya. Any takers?
Cassandrasays – “I’m rather curious as to how he explains why women who already have jobs outside the home should still provide those services to their husbands free of charge, given that most women in the US are in fact employed.”
…
They wouldn’t have to work if there was no maternity leave.
No, I think that’s what he’s getting at.
Dang, maybe he does make more sense drunk than sober.
*hic*
“New” constitution? Did I miss a class?
Anyway, NWO, you do realize that this nation has been in debt since the beginning, right? The Revolutionary War didn’t finance itself.
Also I’m quite handy with repairs, renovation, auto repair. That’ll be extra, but hey.
I imagine NWO’s plan for providing if we had no welfare/Social Security/Medicare/etc. can best be summed up with a quote from Dickens:
“If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.”
@ zhinxy
Hmm. I have 2 bottles of sake, one bottle of red wine, and a couple of bottles of a shitty spiced cider drink that my friend left last time she was here in the house. I wonder if NWO would start to make sense if I drank all of that booze in one sitting?
NWO, not even if you had dollars bills flying out your ears and falling out your ass. Unless you got a complete personality transplant, I’d have to decline your offer.