Message from @PM_ME_UR_PC_SPECS
Discord ID: 516466999623417866
In all of my days at the university, I have found it such a challenge to get a group of women to sit down and discuss philosophy. Open ended without being forced by a professor.
But if you just give a hand full of cannabis or psychedelics to a group of men and eventually the conversation turns to philosophy.
The point I'm trying to get to: Trying to make a basis of biological evolution for the way that either men or women interact with our current society is folly. There are too many conflicting variables.
I like this
this is,good
good job
I find it preposterous when anyone tries to claim that were growing as a society because of the increased female numbers in higher academia. Are they flocking to the four cornerstones that enhance our society? (Politics: Systems creation) (Economy: Systems maintenance and resource allocation) (Technology: Systems enhancement) (Philosophy: Human improvement.) No.
They are flooding humanities (Definition of what a human WAS) and Medical (Human maintenance). The humanities flooding allows them to start altering the viewpoint of what humans were BEFORE, and use that as a rational of why we should be doing what they think. It’s like if I didn’t like the house I built, so I went back, misinterpreted the blueprints, and sued the builder for doing it wrong.
That is NOT a healthy way to build a society.
@Silver_The_Bard Women aren't evil, just feminists seeking to inject their ideology into completely unrelated fields
I'm sure there are plenty of non-feminist women in the humanities and many other fields
And of course most feminists are completely normal and good people. So a fraction of a fraction.
Indeed, but I still feel that feminists in general are misguided but I'll leave that for another debate
Also, some humanities fields aren't just about the background of humanity or society
Psychology in particular covers the human mind and behavior in general
It's just as applicable today as it is to many years ago
Good people putting themselves under the banner of feminism, only gives credibility to the 'top' feminists who actually influence and institute policies which are sexist and harm men. Therefore I dont really care who you are, if you call yourself a feminist, you are my enemy.
The definition of feminism in the dictionary is as follows:
1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests
Definition 1 seems harmless enough, but definition 2 makes it clear that this is a women's movement
Correct
Their argument is equality, but the only care about women
Which normally would be fine, provided men get their own movement
Problem is feminism fights against that
Not because they oppose men's advocacy though
Because MRAs are sexist AFATK
Doesn't matter what their reason is. That they oppose equality and won't listen to other arguments is the point. Why is irrelevent.
There's plenty of documented examples of feminism organizing against men's concerns when it conflicts with their agenda
Instead of working with us, they try to shut us out of the discussion
Sometimes violently
And why?
That is the real question
That they do these things is not doubted
but to say it is because they oppose equality is at best misguided
It's accurate no matter their reason.
Why do you think why they do it changes that they do?
It does not
I never said it does
but it changes how we can judge them on it
and how we can solve the problem
You just said it's misguided to say they oppose equality, when it's a factual statement.