| o_O.Q said: well i'm not going to start doing extensive lists to prove that feminism really is doing this as i figure it should be fairly obvious that considering that the goal of feminism is to change society then there must also be some change in the guidelines that society follows but i will provide one extreme example http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-29619/The-city-banned-men.html where does this come from? i would say that it comes from the perception that men are violent sexually deviant baboons as anita implies here for example
and therefore must have restrictions placed upon them this is where the affirmative consent act comes from now i agree with the purpose of these restrictions they are to provide a safer environment with women, however, there are evidently problems that arise here it is also where we get revisions to rape laws which make it so that women cannot rape men legally
now what surprises me is how men do not get alarmed when they see the comments above by anita for example... is it not apparent that to some degree a hatred of masculinity fuels comments like this that feminist make routinely? why is it that if a man says something similar he is a misogynist but women get a pass? not that hatred should be perpetuated in any form... i don't know perhaps i'm going too far out of the general consensus with this paragraph |
First example? You gotta do better than that. This one is ridiculous. This is more reminiscent of one of those silly backward laws that you only read about. And it was one night. And it indicated that the "male only" night was happening the following week. And a couples night following. So, in effect, it was actual equality. This law was not put into effect by feminists. It was put into effect by a male mayor who wanted to give it a try. More than 13 years ago. I'm guesing there haven't been many (if any) repeats.
Second example. Yeah, it's put into effect for the safety of women. You know, the gender that gets raped hundreds of times more than men. I know this law can be abused by a man-hating woman. But a lot of laws have loopholes and specific wordings that can cause effects not originally intended by the spirit of the law.
Third example. Yeah, the wording is bad. It does mostly protect women from getting raped. Though I'm not sure a woman could actually get away with raping a man as long as the evidence supports it. You're also forgetting that we have anuses. Legally we can get raped, at least in that aspect.
Look, I'm not saying that every law is 100% rock solid in its equality. But you're cherry picking little articles and bits and pieces of these laws and indicating that they COULD be used for bad. But like I said before, I'm not worried that my rights as a human being are being compromised because I have a penis over a vagina. Many of the laws are there to protect women. You know why? Because biologically, men are stronger than women. Men can rape women while they're unconscious. Something that is extremely difficult to do if the roles were reversed. Physically, the odds are heavily stacked against women. Historically, women have been dominated. This is fact. The laws reflect that, and is in no way indicitave of feminism but where society is right now.
The best example provided to me was from HoloDust. But again, this is largely due to society's views on men and women's roles in raising a family than it is from some feminist agenda.
At least, that's how I see it.
Also, Bayonetta is an absolutely ridiculous game in terms of its blatent sexuality. So much so that I can't 100% take it seriously. Sarkeesian absolutely has a point. It just happens to be a REALLY good game. Go figure. Anyways, I don't care how much of a feminazi she is. This petition is still stupid.
