HorrorMovieFans.com

showa58taro wrote:Can you cite evidence of this?

are you asking foo or me? for foo, it seems like it was just a bunch of random users. what do you want proof or evidence of?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:so basically you're expecting random people on the internet not to be judgmental, when it's toward someone you approve of. you cited an opinion section as yay, when it suits you. and booo when you disagree. both are indicative of the internet. not really anything to do with feminism.

that said some highly visible feminists are jerks out to oppress. that's where the focus should be, if you want to call someone out. in my opinion at least.

Just pointing out what feminism really looks like. It is really just a prop for democrats, not a real thing.

Notice how few on the left call it out when directed at conservative women?

that is like saying violence and hate aren't real, because politicians and some newsmedia choose to ignore stories when it doesn't serve their agenda.

Well, let's not pretend violence is not political either. Amazing how many leftists did not see the counter protestors in Charlottesville wielding weapons and masks. Also, how they see little black violence in cities like Chicago and Baltimore but if a cop is involved they see it with clarity that defies belief.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:so basically you're expecting random people on the internet not to be judgmental, when it's toward someone you approve of. you cited an opinion section as yay, when it suits you. and booo when you disagree. both are indicative of the internet. not really anything to do with feminism.

that said some highly visible feminists are jerks out to oppress. that's where the focus should be, if you want to call someone out. in my opinion at least.

Just pointing out what feminism really looks like. It is really just a prop for democrats, not a real thing.

Notice how few on the left call it out when directed at conservative women?

that is like saying violence and hate aren't real, because politicians and some newsmedia choose to ignore stories when it doesn't serve their agenda.

Well, let's not pretend violence is not political either. Amazing how many leftists did not see the counter protestors in Charlottesville wielding weapons and masks. Also, how they see little black violence in cities like Chicago and Baltimore but if a cop is involved they see it with clarity that defies belief.

my point was that you said feminism isn't real. it is. politicians use a lot of actual things to try to manipulate. feminism happens to be one of those things is all.

violence is not political. it is used often for political reasons. but exists outside of politics. feminism is political by it's nature, but that does not mean that it's not a genuine movement.

i think you had the right idea of trying to rise above identity politics. instead of separating things into little boxes. take it all as american issues. if you do something out of bigotry or hatred, that is un-american. but you went back on that, with this thread, seemingly. i don't know.

It is genuine in that it is a re-warming of the same cycle Democrats use to try to whip up their base. Try sexism for awhile, try racism for awhile, try class warfare for awhile...

Remember how sexist Mitt Romney was because of "binders full of women". When he was racist because he implied Obama was lazy? When he was only for the rich?

Occupy Wall Street was replaced by I'm with Her which was replaced by Black Lives Matter. Same rhetoric, puked back up by the people who ate it six months ago.

if you're trying to say that republicans and democrats will use a movement to push their agenda, definitely. if you're saying that that movement, specifically in the case of feminism, only exists for the purpose of manipulation by democrats or republicans, i call bullshit.

trump used immigration to push his agenda. does that mean that immigration isn't real? clinton used lgbt to push her agenda. does that mean that lgbt is not real?

zombie wrote:if you're trying to say that republicans and democrats will use a movement to push their agenda, definitely. if you're saying that that movement, specifically in the case of feminism, only exists for the purpose of manipulation by democrats or republicans, i call bullshit.

trump used immigration to push his agenda. does that mean that immigration isn't real? clinton used lgbt to push her agenda. does that mean that lgbt is not real?

You are comparing the act of immigration, which is obviously a thing, with some bullshit creation? Immigration is an act. Feminism is a political idea.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:if you're trying to say that republicans and democrats will use a movement to push their agenda, definitely. if you're saying that that movement, specifically in the case of feminism, only exists for the purpose of manipulation by democrats or republicans, i call bullshit.

trump used immigration to push his agenda. does that mean that immigration isn't real? clinton used lgbt to push her agenda. does that mean that lgbt is not real?

You are comparing the act of immigration, which is obviously a thing, with some bullshit creation? Immigration is an act. Feminism is a political idea.

fair enough. feminism is a political movement. conservatism is a political movement. liberalism is a political movement. they can all be manipulated by republicans and democrats. which are also political movements while' we're at it. all of them are still real. whether you want them to be or not.

if you disagree with elements of feminism, or with specific feminists, or even disagree with feminism as a whole. just say so. you don't have to make the false claim that the movement is not real.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:if you're trying to say that republicans and democrats will use a movement to push their agenda, definitely. if you're saying that that movement, specifically in the case of feminism, only exists for the purpose of manipulation by democrats or republicans, i call bullshit.

trump used immigration to push his agenda. does that mean that immigration isn't real? clinton used lgbt to push her agenda. does that mean that lgbt is not real?

You are comparing the act of immigration, which is obviously a thing, with some bullshit creation? Immigration is an act. Feminism is a political idea.

fair enough. feminism is a political movement. conservatism is a political movement. liberalism is a political movement. they can all be manipulated by republicans and democrats. which are also political movements while' we're at it. all of them are still real. whether you want them to be or not.

if you disagree with elements of feminism, or with specific feminists, or even disagree with feminism as a whole. just say so. you don't have to make the false claim that the movement is not real.

It is as real as AstroTurf.

zombie wrote:

showa58taro wrote:Can you cite evidence of this?

are you asking foo or me? for foo, it seems like it was just a bunch of random users. what do you want proof or evidence of?

Asking Foo. Unless he has evidence it was a feminist who then flipped, or similar, this is a total non-discussion fantasizes up by Foo to plug HIS agenda regardless of facts.

Is posing for a camera with your tits out so you can get money and they can sell magazines feminist or not feminist?

Foo wrote:Is posing for a camera with your tits out so you can get money and they can sell magazines feminist or not feminist?

It strikes me as irrelevant to feminism.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:if you're trying to say that republicans and democrats will use a movement to push their agenda, definitely. if you're saying that that movement, specifically in the case of feminism, only exists for the purpose of manipulation by democrats or republicans, i call bullshit.

trump used immigration to push his agenda. does that mean that immigration isn't real? clinton used lgbt to push her agenda. does that mean that lgbt is not real?

You are comparing the act of immigration, which is obviously a thing, with some bullshit creation? Immigration is an act. Feminism is a political idea.

fair enough. feminism is a political movement. conservatism is a political movement. liberalism is a political movement. they can all be manipulated by republicans and democrats. which are also political movements while' we're at it. all of them are still real. whether you want them to be or not.

if you disagree with elements of feminism, or with specific feminists, or even disagree with feminism as a whole. just say so. you don't have to make the false claim that the movement is not real.

It is as real as AstroTurf.

if it's just astroturf, ignore it.

Foo wrote:Is posing for a camera with your tits out so you can get money and they can sell magazines feminist or not feminist?

some feminists will denounce that. and some (almost certainly less) feminists will defend it. i'm not sure where you wanna go with this.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:Is posing for a camera with your tits out so you can get money and they can sell magazines feminist or not feminist?

some feminists will denounce that. and some (almost certainly less) feminists will defend it. i'm not sure where you wanna go with this.

Just wondering. If a woman is promoted in part because she is a woman, rather than based purely on merit, is that feminism or not feminism?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:if you're trying to say that republicans and democrats will use a movement to push their agenda, definitely. if you're saying that that movement, specifically in the case of feminism, only exists for the purpose of manipulation by democrats or republicans, i call bullshit.

trump used immigration to push his agenda. does that mean that immigration isn't real? clinton used lgbt to push her agenda. does that mean that lgbt is not real?

You are comparing the act of immigration, which is obviously a thing, with some bullshit creation? Immigration is an act. Feminism is a political idea.

fair enough. feminism is a political movement. conservatism is a political movement. liberalism is a political movement. they can all be manipulated by republicans and democrats. which are also political movements while' we're at it. all of them are still real. whether you want them to be or not.

if you disagree with elements of feminism, or with specific feminists, or even disagree with feminism as a whole. just say so. you don't have to make the false claim that the movement is not real.

It is as real as AstroTurf.

if it's just astroturf, ignore it.

AstroTurf is real. It is just manufactured.

Weird non-sequiteurs.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:Is posing for a camera with your tits out so you can get money and they can sell magazines feminist or not feminist?

some feminists will denounce that. and some (almost certainly less) feminists will defend it. i'm not sure where you wanna go with this.

Just wondering. If a woman is promoted in part because she is a woman, rather than based purely on merit, is that feminism or not feminism?

i don't think there is universal consensus as to whether that would be feminist or not. are you looking for a universal lockstep consensus among all feminists? feminists are people. people have different viewpoints.

Foo, if you rode a fairground ride in 1998, does that make you a good or a bad chef?

Foo wrote:
AstroTurf is real. It is just manufactured.

and you specifically said that feminism is not a real thing.

Foo wrote:
Just pointing out what feminism really looks like. It is really just a prop for democrats, not a real thing.

Notice how few on the left call it out when directed at conservative women?

i disagree. because i see feminists with differing opinions. because i see feminists who are cast out by other feminists. because i don't have an agenda, to try to disprove a movement.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:Is posing for a camera with your tits out so you can get money and they can sell magazines feminist or not feminist?

some feminists will denounce that. and some (almost certainly less) feminists will defend it. i'm not sure where you wanna go with this.

Just wondering. If a woman is promoted in part because she is a woman, rather than based purely on merit, is that feminism or not feminism?

i don't think there is universal consensus as to whether that would be feminist or not. are you looking for a universal lockstep consensus among all feminists? feminists are people. people have different viewpoints.

So is feminism a real thing if there is no consensus on even the most basic situations that would involve women?

How does feminism differ from simply believing in equality for the vast majority?