Why I want feminism and not equality (and why they are not the same thing)

Good Society

Unlike equalists, feminists do not want men to share their oppression

Women ncr

 

How many feminists believe they are working towards equality? How many men self-define as equalists over feminists? Equality is almost universally accepted as the definition of feminism. But the term equality has never been questioned.

I am a feminist and I do not strive for equality. I support liberation. The defenders of equality espouse moderate feminist principles: equal pay for equal work, equal opportunity with no special considerations i.e. positive discrimination, failure is down to the individual, and above all, women must embrace hierarchal work structures where the job always comes first. Equality takes the male status quo as the standard to which women aspire.

To be equal, women have to show they are strong enough to live up to men’s standards in a man’s world. Backers of equality cheer as women enlist in institutionally discriminatory police forces, join the military in invading other countries and committing war crimes, train for the roughest of men’s sports whether its dangerous and cruel horse racing, or life-threatening cage fighting.

Once women have joined male dominated areas of work, nobody asks why anybody regardless of gender would work in these repressive institutions. The crux of the matter is that men live and work in a brutal society, which is maintained through stratified social order based on ritual humiliation, gentleman’s clubs, fights, rites of passage, sexism, and banter.

When women enter the male realm whether law, politics, or a construction site, they find themselves in a repugnant world in which their only means of survival is by undergoing a fundamental transformation leaving them with little opportunity to make any change. We see this manifested in descriptions of women professionals as harsher than men. Assertive women are seen as aggressive bitches.

It is impossible to alter male spheres, which are resistant to outside interference, because women are a minority that could be cut out at anytime, and men have vested interests in preserving the status quo.

The Equality Act 2010, which replaced the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, was designed to give the false impression that women’s subjugation had been legally acknowledged. Political support was gathered because politicians knew no great changes would ensue. Equality legislation exists throughout Europe but nowhere is there equality.

The attitude of the legal profession to equality is best shown by the number of women Attorney Generals over the years: one women in contrast to 202 men. The Act is barely enforceable due to extortionate legal costs and severe costs to time. Of 89 per cent of women health care workers who experience sexual harassment, barely 1 per cent initiate legal actions because they know that regardless of whether they win or lose they will be branded a troublemaker and all hopes of a promotion will be dashed.

The Act is a handmaiden to equality as it strikes down attempts at positive discrimination. Equalists refuse to support positive discrimination; instead they believe in equal treatment and equal outcomes. Here, a contradiction emerges, equalists support 50: 50 men and women in institutions but women will not be recruited in large numbers because ‘equality’ laws have made quotas illegal.

Other unequal situations arise from the equalist debate. A right to maternity leave or an abortion is not an equal right, women are requesting discrimination because of their gendered differences. A woman will never be equal to a man because she can never be the same, and gendered distinctiveness is not valued by equalists.

Arguing about equality or difference results in a debate that drains the life out of the feminist movement. Men plead both equality and difference when it is to their benefit. They argue equality when they want paternity leave, and difference when they want to be paid more prize money for sports.

The equality and difference argument is banal. Equality would be cruel to men if they were treated equal to women: men’s genitals would be sliced up, annual rape of men would increase from 9,000 to 69,000, male prostitution would soar, men’s penises would be sprawled across page 3, men would stroll down the catwalk with their penises hanging out, and the Labour Party would roll out pink vans to attract women voters and blue vans to entice male voters.

Unlike equalists, feminists do not want men to share their oppression.

The equalist debate is one way of preserving patriarchy, whereas feminism seeks to give power to women on their own terms – not mens. This is why I am a feminist, not an equalist. Equality is harmful to women and most men, as they are required to replicate behaviours that are degrading and dehumanising. Once women buy into the masculine terms of society, our civilization will become crueler than ever expected.

Men hold the balance of power. Power is granted in the wrong ways, and used for the wrong ends. Change can come about by redefining and redistributing power, breaking down hierarchal structures, and reevaluating the criteria designed by men.

*This piece was inspired by two of the greatest feminist thinkers of our time, Germaine Greer and Catherine MacKinnon

Charlotte Rachael Proudman is a barrister in human rights law and a PhD candidate in law and sociology researching FGM at the University of Cambridge

←  Older Comments
 →
  • Matheus Souza

    …

  • Gavin Gamache

    I never said anything about differences between men and women, that was you. it wasn’t what we were talking about, so i ignored it. When I said “that’s patriarchy”, I was referring to men being sent off to war and so on. But if you want to talk about differences, could you name some specific ones?

    Is there a transcript of the video? It’s over half an hour long and something of that length is difficult to critique, especially for the third-party readers who are my real audience here.

  • matheus souza is a cunt

    Could you like seriously just shut the fuck up?

  • Matheus Souza

    Woah! A dedicated hater account.

  • Matheus Souza

    I didn’t find the transcript of the particular video I mentioned, but there’s a transcript of a similar one by her: http://owningyourshit.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/transcript-of-hi-danielle-nice-to-make.html

    You should really read her blog posts, by the way.

  • Tom

    Wow, are you low.

  • Gavin Gamache

    Alright cool. I gotta say though that I did try to sit through the video and after a while I just made it a goal to make it to the five-minute mark. I really don’t know where to start. I think she should read some books. Like just any books. Just in the first five minutes:

    – So men won the vote by fighting in wars? What?
    – And then what appears to be a strawman about feminists thinking all women have always been treated worse than all men. Like. No. Two bell curves with midpoints at higher and lower levels. It’s not a hard concept.
    – And wow, “relative ease” with which women forced society’s “hasty capitulation”? Like she knows that history is a thing, right? That we can look back on things which ACTUALLY HAPPENED because people wrote them down? Because I don’t think she’s looked into that…

    But on to the transcript, which is much easier to navigate and pull stuff from (for other readers, here she’s responding to a feminist critique of another MRA’s video, for context’s sake):

    > women were historically uniformly oppressed by their gender, and men historically uniformly privileged relative to them

    This is what I was saying about the strawman. She belabours the word “uniformly”, which is what I think makes this a strawman. Nobody has made that argument.

    > I mean, all it contained was typical feminist talking points framed as axiomatic, self-evident truths, the veracity of which you seem to feel no need to defend or substantiate. You just state them, and assume that any person would agree with both their accuracy, and the conclusions you believe they support.

    Well I mean she does this too soooooo…

    > if that government was headed by a woman

    Isn’t it telling that the idea of a government run by a woman must necessarily be a hypothetical?

    The next thing she goes into is biology, and it’s too long to quote directly, but I’ll point out that human evolution occurred over the course of millions of years, and human culture has necessarily only existed for ten thousand years or so. There is no interplay between them; all the causal effects go one way only.

    This is starting to read like what people call Conservative Feminism, although really it’s just redressed patriarchy: women’s role is in the kitchen, and hey what a swanky role it is; LET those men have their pesky economic and cultural power…

    Sorry dude. I can’t finish this. She’s wrong in really really boring ways.

  • Disdyakis Triacontahedron

    “- So men won the vote by fighting in wars? What?”

    No, she said that the vote for men has always been tied to military service. And that’s true. In most countries, including my own, men can’t vote without enlisting. Women have no similar obligation to be able to vote.

    “- And then what appears to be a strawman about feminists thinking all
    women have always been treated worse than all men. Like. No. Two bell
    curves with midpoints at higher and lower levels. It’s not a hard
    concept.”

    It would be a strawman if it wasn’t constantly repeated by feminists. That’s sort of what “patriarchy” means for most of them: male privilege and female oppression.

    “- And wow, “relative ease” with which women forced society’s “hasty
    capitulation”? Like she knows that history is a thing, right? That we
    can look back on things which ACTUALLY HAPPENED because people wrote
    them down? Because I don’t think she’s looked into that…”

    The fact is that women complained and got the vote. She makes a more detailed historical analysis in other videos, but the point is that women got the vote without having the same responsibilities as men. Essentially, they got it for free.

    “The next thing she goes into is biology, and it’s too long to quote
    directly, but I’ll point out that human evolution occurred over the
    course of millions of years, and human culture has necessarily only
    existed for ten thousand years or so. There is no interplay between
    them; all the causal effects go one way only.”

    Are you insane? Of course our culture is tied to our biology. Our brains are not independent from our biological framework.

    “This is starting to read like what people call Conservative Feminism,
    although really it’s just redressed patriarchy: women’s role is in the
    kitchen, and hey what a swanky role it is; LET those men have their
    pesky economic and cultural power…”

    If this is what you understood from her points, you either:
    1- Made no effort into actually understanding them, because your cognitive bias doesn’t allow you;
    2- Have serious interpretation issues.

  • Gavin Gamache

    The third option is that she doesn’t know what she’s talking about! Enlisted persons were banned from voting in France from 1872 to 1945! The Constitution of Texas likewise originally forbade military members from voting at the state level! The right to vote was almost always tied to property due to tax burden, NOT military service. Saying you need to shoulder certain “responsibilities” to be able to vote is likewise inane. In the era of women’s suffrage (still not a thing in some countries, by the way), women paid taxes. Boom. That’s more than enough.

    As for what feminists say about what patriarchy is, strawman blah blah blah. Maybe you’ve talked to someone who said that once. Doesn’t really matter. It’s not the viewpoint of any major feminist theory.

    I said there’s no interplay between culture and biology because the arrow only points ONE way, not both (which I think is what you meant also). She said “If men had not been prepared to willingly take on those burdens in order to spare women from them, guess what, Danielle? Women would have sturdier skeletons and bigger muscles than they do, because they’d have had to evolve those things in order to survive.” Which is implying that the evolution of sexual dimorphism in primates took place AFTER the development of human culture, which is about as funny as dinosaurs living at the same time as people. Evolutionary psychology, or biological determinism, or whatever premodern pseudoscientific sexist apologism she’s trying to pull with the hunter-gatherer example is also old ground that’s been gone over before. Furthermore, we’re not hunter-gatherers anymore. We can drop the wage gap/suffrage/whatever schtick.

    Hey how about this, for every blog post of hers I read, you should read a post from this site: http://feministcurrent.com/

    Considering the glaring errors in her spiel, I think I know what she’s talking about better than she does, and yeah it does look pretty Con-Fem.

  • Yasmine

    I think you must be trolling. I’m part Jew in the sense that I have Jewish heritage. I have no desire to ‘purge’ Jews from anywhere, since that would be a dick move, and many of my family and friends would be affected.
    Also, I’m not in favour of FGM *or* circumcision of boys. I don’t want ANY babies getting cut up, and on the other hand I support all adults being free to do whatever they want to their genitals.
    As for your last sentence, I actually can’t work out what you mean, so I can’t address it.
    I suggest if you have a problem with what I’m saying you go away and deal with it on your own, because your incoherent arguments aren’t going to convince me of whatever view it is you hold.

  • Guest

    No answer to facts? Right.

  • Guest

    I’m not the one attacking. And those are Jews you’re attacking, not strawmen. You gotta try and distract from action on FGM somehow, of course, and Jews make a nice target. Right.

  • Guest

    Ah, the Jew’s stupid, you yell. Wanting to end FGM is trolling, you broadcast.

  • Guest

    The truth’s like that.

  • Guest

    Ah, so you’re a Muslim ultra-rich…got it. And you don’t only think you’re superior.

    I need to stop being so nice.

  • Guest

    Oh, you mean “UR not rich, enjoy!”.

    You keep accusing me of your problems, as I refuse to stop using facts, which to you are crap. You have said, and I agree, I’m British. Well, yes.

  • Guest

    No, you’re either a Jew or you’re not. As you make a claim, then immediately reject it, as you make excused for FGM and dilute fighting against it.

    And of course you can’t understand English, as a good Islamist. Of course the Jew must be silenced in your world, as you call opposing FGM is not convincing and think I have an interest in “convincing” you of anything.

  • Cod Gob

    That’s wonderful

  • Alice

    You write, “We (men) are the ones that are conscripted to die in wars….”

    Well, who does that? Who makes that choice, to conscript men?

    Men!

    I’m so tired of MRAs complaining about *men’s* decisions and behaviors.

  • Alice

    Work environments should be tailored to work for both sexes, so that both women and men can work in them.

    For example, heavy boxes of items (such as a 50-lb bundle of paper bags) should, wherever possible, be broken into lower-weight packages (25-lb. bundles of paper bags.)

    This would ensure that as great a percent of women could lift them safely as the percent of men can lift 50 lb. bundles.

    By reducing the weights of the bundles, it reduces the chance of people of either sex getting permanent injuries.

    Any job can be scaled down to be more viable for women.

    Men then benefit from a safer work environment: one of the chief complaints of MRAs, that men work in dangerous environments and therefore are “disposable.”

    Well, think about it, MRAs: who designed and defined the parameters of male work environments?

    MEN!

    Stop irrationally blaming women for what MEN have created that harms MEN!

  • CryptoGiveaway

    “The
    crux of the matter is that men live and work in a brutal society, which is
    maintained through stratified social order based on ritual humiliation,
    gentleman’s clubs, fights, rites of passage, sexism, and banter.”

    —–Just to be clear, 100% of women are good people, caring, generous, and have nothing to do with what you mentioned above. What you said is not a reflection of feminism as a whole, not a reflection of the common theme “Men do everything, women are only victims”

    Also, just to be clear, men control the patriarchy right? So they would change all that if they wanted to right? But they dont, because the like the brutal society which is
    maintained through stratified social order based on ritual humiliation,
    gentleman’s clubs, fights, rites of passage, sexism, and banter.” Right? Just to be clear, you make no distinction from those man, and all men… Or… Yea ok, All men are that way :)

    “The
    Act is a handmaiden to equality as it strikes down attempts at positive
    discrimination. Equalists refuse to support positive discrimination; instead
    they believe in equal treatment and equal outcomes. Here, a contradiction
    emerges, equalists support 50: 50 men and women in institutions but women will
    not be recruited in large numbers because ‘equality’ laws have made quotas
    illegal.”

    —–I believe that we should all be equal… Does that mean I am on board with the truly INSANE idea that all institutions should be exactly 50:50? NOT – AT – ALL! Do I scream discrimination when I see that the yearbook club is 90% girls? Do I scream discrimination at the fact there are no “Male Studies” at my local college? Do I scream Discrimination because there are more girls in college right now than boys? Do you (the person reading my thoughts) REALLY believe that this writer wants 50:50 representation in the mechanics garage, coal mines, steel foundries, factories, construction etc – or ONLY the jobs and positions that are desirable to women?

    “Other
    unequal situations arise from the equalist debate. A right to maternity leave
    or an abortion is not an equal right, women are requesting discrimination
    because of their gendered differences. A woman will never be equal to a man
    because she can never be the same, and gendered distinctiveness is not valued
    by equalists.”

    —–PERFECT! This is something I always have to wait and find a feminist say before I can bring it up, because god forbid a man mention that women and men might be sexually dimorphic… When a man says “Is it possible there are fewer women than men because women dont want to join a particular career path?” its obvious that this man is woman hating dick faced non thinker who cannot see beyond his own male privilege and understand that men and women are 100% the same outside our sex organs. 97% of workplace related deaths are MEN – Lets work on getting some more women killed in the line of work, just to be SURE everything is 100% equal… or is that nuts…

    “Arguing
    about equality or difference results in a debate that drains the life out of
    the feminist movement. Men plead both equality and difference when it is to
    their benefit. They argue equality when they want paternity leave, and
    difference when they want to be paid more prize money for sports.”

    —–It is interesting here how you say that men want paternity leave when they become parents, but those dirty men also want to be paid more prize money for sports… Jesus christ… This is why its hard to take you seriously! You are comparing a situation in which millions of men will find themselves in, that makes logical sense and is a part of real life (paternity leave), and comparing it to Prize money for sports!?!?!?! Those people arguing over prize money for sports are not in need of paternity leave, and your assumption that “men” are doing this is… Well let me put it this way –
    You say, Men want Paternity leave, AND more money from sports prizes – UNFAIR!

    I say, Women want equal pay, AND they want men castrated worldwide – FAIR?

    Not many women want that, but some do (castration agenda…) Just as not many men care how fucking much money a dancing NFL goon takes home, but some do…

    Now, lets put the label in there to make sure we all know there are only two types of people in this world, Men who want paternity leave AND sports wage increase, and Women who want equal pay and castration of all males :)

    “The
    equality and difference argument is banal. Equality would be cruel to men if
    they were treated equal to women: men’s genitals would be sliced up, annual rape of men would increase from 9,000 to 69,000, male prostitution
    would soar, men’s penises would be sprawled across page 3, men would stroll down
    the catwalkwith their penises
    hanging out, and the Labour Party would roll out pink vans to attract women voters and blue vans to entice male voters.”

    —–Ok… I would like to start by saying that when blacks were fighting for equal rights back in the day, WHO THE FUCK THOUGHT THEY WERE ARGUING FOR THE RIGHT TO BAN WHITE PEOPLE FROM ESTABLISHMENTS, WHO THOUGHT THEY WERE ARGUING FOR THE RIGHT TO DESCRIMINATE AND BEAT WHITE PEOPLE IN PUBLIC, WHO THOUGHT THEY WANTED THE RIGHT TO OWN A LEGAL SYSTEM THAT WAS 100% ON THE SIDE OF BLACKS?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!

    NOGODDAMNFUCKING ANYBODY!!!!!!

    We are in america, so its hard to see what you mean about females genitals being mutilated when it is actually almost entirely MENS GENITALS WHO ARE MUTILATED! I think that if you pick up the right magazine, you WILL see male genitalia sprawled out on page 3, but I cant DARE suggest that the reason female bodies are plastered everywhere is because sexuality is different between the sexes, that men are more visual and are more easily controlled via that type of advertising… NO! We are 100% equal in every way, this is purely the exploitation of women to the explicit benefit of men… (despite the distinct possibility that these images could fuck up a mans life slowly but surly as he soaks it all in over a lifetime)

    The pink van thing was stupid – but was it really so bad? They thought they could get some women interested with a pink van… What if they had done this to black people using a fancy hummer and rims? Its obviously short sighted, ignorant, and a bad idea all together, but would it really imply that they think black people are (insert every feminist comment about pink van here), or would it reflect the believe on part of the advertisers/politicians that black people may identify more with this vehicle than their usual?

    Welp, thats it – sorry for getting angry, but I am 8 hours into my research today and this article touted the exact type of “I am perfect” and “Men are evil” attitude I despise.

  • CryptoGiveaway

    Your actually trying to say that because this person claims (correctly btw) that circumcision is mutilation, that he is anti Semitic? Unless I missed something, and if I did please PLEASE fill us all in – you are a truly insane person.

    You say same old crap to his astute observation, when in reality you are the loser, the pathetic shit stain on reality acting as though you have no responsibility to even turn your brain on before interacting with others… For the love of god – if you can truly believe that because someone says some % of boys die from circumcision, that this person hates and believes jews should be killed – YOU SHOULD HONESTLY CONSIDER TAKING A STEP BACK, AND ATTEMPTING TO RELEARN EVERYTHING YOU THOUGHT YOU EVER LEARNED.

  • CryptoGiveaway

    I can understand your point, but it sounds like your saying that if we can make FMG safer, at least as safe as it is for boys, then the practice is acceptable…

  • Cod Gob

    Ok, firstly I was not talking about physical limitations, i was talking about preferences. There is likely a reason why I have never come across a woman collecting bins or a female cement mixer and building site laborer. If those kinds of work are not appealing to women, I imagine no amount of “scaling” will change that.
    Also, like i said in another response, this isn’t just a man thing. My example was to do with being a novelist, by try going into HR, beauty treatment or child caring and see how many men you come across. Why? Because men by and large are drawn to other professions.
    That’s how jobs are “tailored”. They are tailored by the people who work there. If the people who were drawn to work in construction were not men, it would not be tailored to men. If women had always been drawn to those industries, there would be far less of n imbalance.
    This is n example of blaming people for going with their preference, and that it illogical to me. It’s like saying women should have the right to go into industries they’re not drawn to Which they do, but they rightly choose not to. There is no “blame” to be issued here, particularly telling a whole gender not to blame women while simultaneously blaming men for something. That’s hypocritical

  • bmorejoe

    The comments in reply to this comment validate the comment. Those who have ears, let them hear.

  • robertcp

    An interesting point of view, which convinces me that I am an equalist rather than a feminist.

  • Mitchell_anthony

    just from the title of this article “why i want feminism and not equality” should clearly show how much feminists want to hate men

    you know, i bet all the male homeless majority feels privileged, i bet all the male prisoners feel privileged, i bet the equal pay act proves there is a wage gap (the wage gap is caused by different job choices, to kill this gap you’d need communism and we all know how that went)

  • Disdyakis Triacontahedron

    Check out Margaret Thatcher and other female leaders.

  • greg

    ‘life-threatening cage fighting’ woosh – literally all credibility gone.

  • Alice

    I tried taking classes in several trades and dealt with so much sexism, it was intolerable and I left. I would have loved to have been an automechanic or a greenskeeper or a carpenter, but it was intolerable. I have met so many women with the same experience.

  • Cod Gob

    Sorry to hear that, but you haven’t specified what you mean by “sexism”, as in you haven’t given an example and It is hard to reply without some context. Honestly, much of the time I find my self disagreeing with someone on what sexism actually is, so i prefer to ask.
    On that note, I learnt to be a chef years ago and worked as one for 6 months. However, the atmosphere (of men and women) was really intense, constant fights and arguments and high pressure, and i eventually decided it wasn’t worth it. This example has nothing to do with gender but about the work itself. In an example such as this where neither men or women were the majority, and with most of them enjoying the industry just as it is and choosing to keep working in it, should I rightly expect the industry to change because i personally did not want to work in that environment? Bearing in mind that the industry functions just fine without someone like me who’s preferences lie in other work after my experience

  • churchboy

    What a dumb bitch. Men have their genitals sliced up at birth in America. And for the dumb ass that says its not the same as FGM, the foreskin is where most of the nerves on a penis are. People use to think the world was flat, now they’re learning its not just a little piece of skin too. Men don’t all want to commit war crimes and beat horses. All sports are potentially life threatening, besides pussy sports, like golf or bowling. Cage fighting is about thousands of years of martial arts tradition, discipline, and courage. This chick is just butt hurt because she’s not strong enough to take on a guy in the ring and skilled enough to race a horse. My girlfriend races horses like a bad ass and smokes me every time, thanks to years of practice and hard work. This chick just makes excuses for her lack of skills by blaming men and saying all of that shit is oppressive because she sucks at it. She sounds like she has penis envy…

  • churchboy

    Wrong, the foreskin has more nerves than any other part of a penis. It has more than twice as many nerves as a clitoris, so its actually more sensitive. I was circumcised at 7 because some f*ckhead paedophile doctor convinced my mother it was necessary when I absolutely didn’t want it. It hurt so bad I was throwing up from the pain. You have to learn the anatomy of a penis and what the purposes for that skin are before you say its not just as bad as FGM. The glans is not the most sensitive part, its actually the foreskin.

  • churchboy

    You. Are. A. F*cking. Psychopath.

  • churchboy

    Wrong, circumcision causes numerous problems. More than a third of them have complications. Too much skin could be removed, causing a tight circumcision which causes painful erections for life. Skin bridging. Numbness. Infection. Excessive scarring. Neuropathy. It goes on. FGM and MGM are equally appalling. Anybody who says otherwise is a TRUE sexist.

  • churchboy

    Some men do hack up their genitals for women. Dudes have gotten circumcised because their woman wants it…that’s just unfathomable to me. The woman is a psycho and the man has no balls.

  • churchboy

    Feminism is about lazy self righteous bitches shifting blame and trying to bring men down instead of raising women up. That’s why they nag about offensive superhero t shirts instead of focusing on REAL women’s issues. And pro gun is rape denialism?! What kind of shit is that? Bullets stop rapes, so I guess it is rape denial for the rapist.

  • churchboy

    Cowardly guest….O_O

  • LaScapigliata

    Still you can maintain an erection and feel sexual pleasure, so its definately not the same. Also your mother had the decency to take you to a real surgeon, when most girls being subjected to FGM, are being cut by primitive blades by voodoo witches.
    So I hear you when you say its something brutal and i think its should be stopped too, but its not the same.

  • Vidopoulos

    Hello citizen of rural Uganda.

  • churchboy

    Women who have had their clitoris removed still report having orgasms. They still have a g spot which is the root of the nerve bundle that makes the clitoris. And actually I’m circumcised and its a lot less sensitive than it was, actually makes it difficult to get off. I have to make a conscious effort. So you’re wrong. It does effect pleasure drastically.

  • churchboy

    And my mother wasn’t decent for not bothering to do any research first before taking me to a surgeon who mutilated me for no medical reason. I resent my mother for that. I was old enough to remember it. I didn’t want it done and I had no say. Mutilation is mutilation, whether its with a scalpel or a sharp rock.

  • LaScapigliata

    Funny you remember it that way. It must have been traumatizing.
    I have another conversation in another chat, and the cercumisized person insists it was good for his health and sex life.

  • BadWolf

    I found this a fascinating insight into an area I thought I understood but clearly didn’t. It’s very true, modern society is male-centric and in many ways exceedingly unhealthy. We take resources, take land, take money. There is little nurture, little support or caring. Having recently left London after 18 years, the veil is freshly pulled back. Forcing women to conform to male requirements is a false equality, forcing men to conform to female requirements is equally false (but the description very eye opening). I don’t know what the answer is, but clearly the current version is not it.

  • BadWolf

    Wow. So basically you just proved the exact point. Hey i’ve an idea, why don’t you try and take on a woman in a competition where she has a natural advantage? And then see how ‘butthurt’ you are when you struggle. Women are not men, nor should they try to be. Likewise, men are not women and shouldn’t try to be. Measuring one by the rule of other is entirely nonsensical and entirely the point of this article. Maybe you just measured yourself by the rule of intelligence and failed. I’m sure, you managed to read this, you’ll be butthurt about it.

  • BadWolf

    the entire content of your post should clearly show how much you want to hate feminists (and not get the actual point of the article). I have generally disliked feminists, because of the way they’ve acted, but this seems very different to the feminism i’ve encountered before

  • BadWolf

    Wow. Disagreeing with the widespread normalisation of what was purely a Jewish only tradition across America is not Jewhate, you hopeless moron. Why should non-Jews be forced to have circumcision? Why should women be forced to have FGM? No they are not the same thing, but not so different either. The religion involved is entirely unimportant, and you’re just using it as an excuse.

  • BadWolf

    You really do have an axe you want to grind eh. Doesn’t really matter what anyone says that entirely proves you wrong, you’ll grind that axe, bang that drum. Shame the drum is your empty head.

  • BadWolf

    “It’s like, you aren’t actually reading what I am saying or posting, just assuming what you think I believe and responding to it.”

    Yes, Christopher, that is EXACTLY what this person is doing.

  • BadWolf

    Honestly, don’t go trying to taint your nonsensical statements with Britishness. Sarcasm isn’t particularly British anyway; irony is. Ironically.

←  Older Comments
 →