Sign In
Close
This is just a small and quick piece on a major modern religion.
It seems that many folks follow this religion now.
Submission Information
- Views:
- 591
- Comments:
- 9
- Favorites:
- 0
- Rating:
- General
- Category:
- Visual / Traditional
Comments
-
-
Maybe? Hope that you have a good one either way. :3
-
Is it supposed to be a reference to the dusty, old concept of fursecution that occasionally resurfaces? And if so, what does it have to do with Anarchist Feminism? Because that one is neither Theistic nor specialised in fursecuting.
-
The intent was the following:
The individuals up the front are males, they are depicted as anthropomorphic as modern day feminism constantly demonises males and appears to think of them as 'less than human'. Evidenced by the various things they have and do push for in law and university.
The group isn't Anarchist Feminism, it is just feminism. And while it may not seem theistic, putting it in this context is in an attempt to symbolise the fact that modern day feminism requires a significant amount of faith and you must also accept some various core tenants which are unfalsifiable. Unfalsifiable tenants and faith are the core foundations of religion, and as such it was in an attempt to draw attention to the fact that it has become more of a faith based movement rather than something positive and useful.
:3-
You may have to pinpoint the origin of the threat better.
The depiction of males as half-animals is by no means exclusive to misandrist straw feminists, but also a convenient tool of rape culture in order to stabilise the current system of exploitation and locking everyone in "predestined" social roles. Though "The Patriarchy" is just one of the many oppressive mechanisms of the system next to more frequently known ones such as Racism and Classism, but it works like a charm when it comes to dividing people in their common struggle for an egalitarian society. Especially since it's so easy to blame any (at first glance solely) misandrist act which supports "The Patriarchy" on all feminists regardless of how nonsensical that would be for their greater goal of creating equality between the sexes. Pretty much like you can easily trick have-nots these days into fearing "Socialist" redistribution of wealth from top to bottom incomes.-
Interesting comment.
The depiction of males as anthropomorphic in an attempt to demonstrate the current third-wave feminist view that men are less than human was selected as a rather simple depiction. While you declare straw feminist, unfortunately it isn't a strawman argument. #killallmen is a good and very easy example. Or even the vast numbers of feminists who declare that men are the problem and that a significant portion should be killed. Even the creator of the Society for Cutting Up Men (SCUM) was a feminist. These are not strawmen arguments. They are examples of the current way the vocal aspects of the movement have become.
In addition, if you look to feminist organisations. Such as the 'White Ribbon Campaign' and the like. Unfortunately the push to government through the feminist lens has been that domestic violence is purely a gendered issue. That men are the perpetrators and women are the victims. Always. And that is where the funding goes. Doesn't matter that a significant portion of victims are men, that doesn't work for the feminist narrative.
And yes. Feminism is pushing 'predestined' social roles. Women are victims. Men are perpetrators. Women are weak and incapable, they need assistance and quotas and government mandates. Men are the ones who all work together to put women down. Women are oppressed. Men are privileged.
They have pushed the narrative so far that men can't even discuss issues that they have. There is no way to move away from those 'predestined' social roles you mention. Because feminism has been pushing so hard, and society has accepted, because society has consistently wanted to protect and look after women. It just so happens that feminism wants to continue that narrative.
'The Patriarchy' is basically a boogeyman, which doesn't exist and hasn't for a very long time. It isn't an 'oppressive mechanism'. Racism and classism though, yeah, definitely. They still hang on and there are still issues in those areas. It definitely is slowly being pushed towards more acceptance, but at the expense of others as well. With quotas forced on businesses, that means they have to be sexist and racist in their hiring practices. So, that isn't good either and isn't a solution.
Misandrist acts which support 'the patriarchy' are exactly what feminism wants and is aiming for. Look at domestic violence for an example. If the issue was actually dealt with properly, and all violence in the home addressed, then the issue would become significantly less. But, by making it a gendered issue, when it isn't, that just perpetuates the problem.
Feminist isn't working to 'create equality between the sexes'. If they were then they would actually care about major issues faced by men. But instead, they shut that conversation down and call any portion of the conversation highlighting that they are being sexist in their diagnosis of problems 'misogyny' rather than actually having a discussion.
Feminists do not care for equality of the sexes. That is true by the acts that they perpetuate.
-
With "predestined" social roles I am referring to acts of shaming and aggression that for instance keep males from doing anything social where they have to deal with the care of infants, children or elderly people, and women out of positions of leadership where "tough choices" have to be made.
Reducing non-males to nothing but victims and the perpetration of this role is playing a major factor in maintaining the prejudices towards what purposes each sex supposedly serves.
Women who gang up on a father who visits the playground with his daughter -because it is such an uncommon sight to have a father take care of his kids with no nefarious motives- are not feminists. The same goes for courts that always give the custody of a child to the mother regardless of whether she is actually capable of taking care of her child. This latter example is one of those that are both misogynist and misandrist.
And if a male is being shamed for being the victim of domestic violence or sexual abuse, that's not feminism either. And neither is playing all victims of domestic violence against each other in order to belittle the problem; which is what "A Voice For Men" has been doing with its dispute with the White Ribbon Campaign and which is happening with the attempt to belittle "Black Lives Matter" with "All Lives Matter" this time around.As for me referring to straw feminists, I have simply found, that while people like to vilify all feminists by assuming them all to be followers of the already falsified SCUM manifesto [see my previous comment on Thatcher, Merkel]. I have yet to encounter at least one member of SCUM in the flesh, and would like to know whether you had any success in encountering any in real life.
And lastly how old do you think Third Wave Feminists are by now? Do you think the discourses have stopped in the 1980s? There is a new wave in town and it's up to us to find and encourage the all-encompassing current discourses that strive for equality.-
Ahh, apologies I must have misunderstood what you meant by 'predestined' social roles. However there are laws in place that protect women and provide them equal opportunities in most western countries. Heck, it has gotten to the point where quotas are being established for, not just the general jobs, but also the upper level positions of leadership. Of course this is sexist and discriminatory. But that doesn't matter, because feminism has pushed it, right?
And, even though humans are a sexually dimorphic species which does indeed mean that males and females are actually different, again, it is only the equality of outcomes that people seem to care about. Even though, it is only equality of outcomes for the best jobs and the most prestigious positions. Most of the horrible jobs, and all of the most dangerous jobs are held by majority men, but again, no-one really cares about that. 97% or so of workplace fatalities are men due to them taking worse and more dangerous jobs. But, hey, they only keep society running. No big deal.
Regarding your comment on reducing non-males to victims, well, yeah, that is exactly what current feminism is pushing. Look at all of the domestic violence groups in Australia. All of them are run by feminists. And all of them push that particular narrative. And yes, it is a major factor in maintaining prejudices towards what each sex supposedly serves. That is what feminism does.
Regarding women who gang up on a father who visits a playground with his daughter. You say they are not feminists. I say, you are not psychic. Feminism is something that is chosen by the people themselves. You can't just declare that things you don't like, that feminists do, are not feminists. They are. I am an egalitarian. I believe in equal opportunity, but I also understand that equal opportunity doesn't mean equality of outcome.
This artwork was to comment on feminism currently. Yes, there are some good feminists around, such as Christina Hoff Sommers, who appears to be more of an egalitarian than a feminist, but she chooses to call herself a feminist, and therefore is a feminist. However, much of feminism currently acts as a religion. There are three major unfalsifiable claims, 'the patriarchy', 'the wage gap' and 'rape culture'. All of these are not real, however they must be accepted to 'be a good feminist'.
Feminism pushed for the 'Violence Against Women Act' in the USA. That is a sexist law which shames and jails males even if they are the victim of domestic violence. That was pushed by feminist organisations. You claim these things 'aren't feminism' however they are. They have been pushed by feminists and they have been supported by feminist organisations. You cannot just claim that it is 'not a true Scotsman' even though it is.
Regarding the White Ribbon Campaign which 'A Voice For Men' has put up. As in whiteribbon.org, that is actually gender neutral. They have even gotten Erin Pizzey who started the first five domestic violence shelters in the UK before she was forced out of the country by radical feminists who didn't like the fact that she started to see domestic violence as a power and control issue rather than a gendered issue. Again, these were and are true feminists who did this.
Sure, SCUM was a bad example. But it is a popular example which is why I pulled it out. And no, I have not met any legitimate follower of SCUM. There are plenty of other examples of insane feminists.
How old do I think Third-Wave Feminists are by now? Oh, well, there are feminists who are a part of the third-wave who are probably in their late 60's, and there are also ones in their early teens. What about it?
Do I think discourse stopped in the 1980s? No, egalitarians have been talking for a while. The 'religion' of feminism however has been shutting down descenting opinions and thoughts for a very long time. A good example would be all of the 'women's studies' courses offered at universities, and all of the 'anti-rape' training for men.
There is a new wave in town? Really? Each wave of feminism seems to have moved it closer and closer to a totalitarian religion. I wouldn't like to see what the next wave brings. That is somewhat frightening.
“ and it's up to us to find and encourage the all-encompassing current discourses that strive for equality”
I agree, more people should be egalitarians, and drop the need for unfalsifiable foundations as part of a group which discriminates based on sex.
-
Really wanted to respond to one more of your points: "The same goes for courts that always give the custody of a child to the mother regardless of whether she is actually capable of taking care of her child. This latter example is one of those that are both misogynist and misandrist."
That is really interesting. Because in the US the National Organization for Women (NOW), which is a feminist organization based on feminist ideals, are the main group who keeps pushing for women being the primary caregiver. They have successfully campaigned against law changes to try and make the courts to consider which parent would be the best carer, rather than defaulting to the woman.
So. I guess in your mind they are not true feminists.
Except that they are. And they are very good at fighting to keep the roles the way they are. Because, according to feminism, remember, men are less than human. They have 'toxic masculinity' they can't be trusted with children (even though most child abuse and child killing is done by women). But, lets just completely forget what is actually going on, and believe in the faith based system of unfalsifiable statements that is modern feminism.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Link
robatdteufel
That joke must have gone straight over my head.