Made an info graph today..
I am not anti-feminist because I don’t understand feminism…
… I am anti-feminist because I do.
I am not anti-feminist because I don’t understand feminism…
… I am anti-feminist because I do.
Just a few screen shots showcasing some of female-exclusive scholarships and handouts available in Queensland.
This makes my blood boil right through my skin.
If you are a female and the amount of males is deterring you away from a particular field of study, then maybe your motivation and ambition for that area of interest isn’t particularly high. You should probably consider other study options. If you are seriously going to let the gender of other students discourage you in such a way, you really aren’t mature enough to be studying in such an environment. Those other students are there because they are passionate and excited to learn something they love, and you want to demonise them for it because of their gender?
Men aren’t the problem for consistently and overwhelming preferring fields such as engineering and architecture. Why should it be their problem? Why should they be sorry for trying to study and learn about something they love? If anything, females are perpetuating their own problem by not consistently and overwhelming preferring these areas of study (God, I hate the term “male-dominated”). Sitting back and waiting for other females to fill the void is lazy. Complaining about other females not choosing these stereotypically-male career paths is ignorant. You either lead by example, or your opinion means nothing.
(For those of you are curious: I am a female architecture student)
I fully believe that enrolments, scholarships, job proposals, pay rises etc. should be competency based only, with no regard to the gender of the recipient/applicant. I stand by this 100% because that is what gender equality is. Gender equality isn’t filling up quotas to balance female:male ratios because gender equality is giving credit where credit is due without discriminating against their gender (this can also apply to age or racial discrimination). Denying a exceptionally qualified man a job because the company already has lots of men, and instead settling for a lesser qualified woman because of a thinly veiled excuse like diversity, is discrimination.
I do think females need to be more encouraged to be proud of their enjoyment of maths and engineering from an earlier age. I don’t want to see young girls being ashamed of playing with robots and other mechanical toys. Yet with gender targeted scholarships like the ones above, it still sends the message that women aren’t good enough to do it on their own. Nothing is more disempowering, and undermining, than babying females with special treatment. It is condescending.
I want to see women actively seeking these career options because they have a passion for that field of study. Passion is what makes a truly gifted and respectable career woman. You can buy numbers with gender-discriminatory scholarships, but you can’t buy passion.
This is a riddle. Crack the feminist logic code to move on to the next level.
Men are guilty until proven innocent, while women are innocent until proven guilty.
If your first response to this video is #notallwomen, then you are missing the point. This is exactly the sort of hypocritical logic fallacy that feminists will use to shame, guilt, and dehumanise the entire male gender. Remember the #yesallwomen craze that swept twitter up in a storm? Did you see the outrage from feminists when men dared to defend themselves by saying #notallmenas a response to being hastily generalised as women-hating demons? How dare men defend themselves against the experiences of women who had been hurt by other men.
Take a good look at this video. If it is unreasonable to use the actions of one female to generalise the entire female gender, why do feminists insist on using this same logic against men?
Do you know what is scary? Knowing that as a man, any woman can collapse beside you and cry assault, and if you don’t have any video footage to defend yourself with then you can safety assume that police will systematically side with the female and arrest you as a first response. Men are guilty until proven innocent, while females are innocent until proven guilty. Imagine calling the cops because you are being physically or sexually assaulted by a female, and they turn up and arrest you while they console the guilty female who is suddenly playing victim. At least they didn’t ask you what you were wearing as you get carted off to prison in the back of a paddy-wagon. Right?
But… but #notallwomen are like that! Well obviously it is a callous, cold hearted and hurtful generalisation to assume that all women are manipulative man-hating monsters. Isn’t it?
Do you get it? Does the #notallmen begin to make more sense now that it also applies to #notallwomen? Or are we still going to use double standards so we can play the victim?
"I need feminism because… [underarm hair]”
Yesterday, while my boyfriend and I was watching Game of Thrones, he had his arm around me and I began to snuggle into his shoulder. He immediately pulled his arm into his side, and when I asked him why, he said he felt a little bit embarrassed because of his armpit hair. He was worried that it would’ve smelt and repulsed me, which is why he pulled his arm in. I asked a few more questions and he eventually he said that he thought it looked repulsive, it caused bad odor, felt a little bit itchy, and simply made him a little bit self-conscious. I tried telling him that most men had it and that it looked perfectly acceptable, but he kept his arms down and just said it was gross.
Yes, my boyfriend hates his underarm hair.
So I asked him why he doesn’t just shave it off. As embarrassed as he is by his armpit hair, he still feels pressured to look like a man. He said he didn’t want to shave it off because it wasn’t the manly thing to do. He NEVER said that he would look like a woman, because the difference between men and women is obviously a bit more complex than just a bit of hair under the pits. He simply talked about the pressure that he felt as a male to live up to certain expectations.
Now feminists will insist that de-stigmatising female armpit hair will magically make men feel better about shaving their pit-hair. They are wrong. They are simply making an excuse to prioritise female issues while justifying their discrimination by saying that the second-hand benefits will solve the mens issues too. Those sort of excuses are disgustingly manipulative.
I absolutely abhor the fact that many feminists will blame certain male behaviour on a “deep-rooted hatred” of all things feminine as the underlying cause of their issues. For example:
- Men don’t wear dresses, because they hate feminine traits.
- Men don’t shave, because they hate feminine traits.
- Men don’t wear the colour pink, because they hate feminine traits.
- Men don’t sew, because they hate feminine traits.
Could we then insist that females do not shave their pits because of a deep-rooted hatred of men? For example:
- Females aren’t hairy, because they hate masculine traits.
- Females aren’t dirty and unkept, because they hate masculine traits.
- Females aren’t bulky at the gym, because they hate masculine traits
Of course not, because as soon as you apply that exact same logic to women, it is suddenly invalid. As soon as you suggest that women shave their armpits because armpit hair is masculine and they do not want to look like manly men, feminists will go into defense mode and talk about the patriarchy and being oppressed. It is a double standard that they use, again, to promote and prioritise their own struggles, while ignoring the alternative struggles that men face.
Does it ever occur to anyone that sometimes, men don’t like the gendered stereotypes society has placed on them either. Or are we going to continue to presume that only women are affect by armpit hair related stereotypes?
"I need feminism because… I shouldn’t have to hide my boobs!"
Alright, I’m going to ignore any sort of sexualization of boobs or whether they are or aren’t sexual organs arguments. I’m going to look at the realistic implications of legalising female toplessness:
- Forcefully groping someones breasts will no longer fall under the category of sexual assault. It will simply be physical assault, which will receive a significantly smaller punishment than the latter.
- If someone familiar to you gives you a hug, and as their arms wrap around you they end up grabbing the sides of your naked breasts instead of your shoulders, don’t expect to have any solid ground to report them. No, touching your boobs would be as un-offensive as touching your shoulders. I hope you are comfortable with a small amount friendly fondling.
- Now that your boobs are on display, you need to accept the fact that people will comment on them. In the same way that people comment on your dress style, your hair, your arms, your legs, your piercings, your tan, your face, your feet, or anything else that you choose to uncover and put on display, they will also begin to comment on your breasts.
Here are some questions you should expect to receive when you go topless:
- Topless scenes will be acceptable for children’s movies and television. If being topless is as natural and as un-offensive as wearing a shirt, I don’t see why anyone would think this is unreasonable. We can have great time watching cartoons of women with breasts that defy physics. Our young girls, who won’t even have breasts at this stage, are going to have a great time hitting puberty.
- Now that we have legalized baring our breasts publicly, we cannot discriminate and put an age limit on this issue. This included teenies. Yes, those preteen girls with their little buds will be flouncing them around for any pedophile to fantasise over. Yes, those same pedophiles could even take photos of her, not directly of course, but she will be in the photo none the less. They can then take those photos home and wank all over it. The best part about it, feminists have made it legal for this to happen because of their bare-breast campaign.
- You can’t even keep photography of female toplessness illegal, because it is currently legal to have men topless in photographs. If you tried illegalize female toplessness yet keep male toplessness legal, than that would be discrimination and not equality. As we all know, feminism is about equality, right?