|Funny Pictures||Funny Videos|
|Funny GIFs||YouTube Videos|
Rank #718 on CommentsLevel 315 Comments: Wizard
OfflineSend mail to orangepikmin Block orangepikmin Invite orangepikmin to be your friend flag avatar
latest user's comments
|#12 - Sooo... what is *********** ? [+] (2 new replies)||11/15/2013 on Explanations||+1|
|#23 - Isn't that what any person does on a blog anyway?||11/15/2013 on Feminism in a nutshell.||+1|
|#4 - I chuckled so loudly my dog thought it was thundering outside … [+] (4 new replies)||11/15/2013 on Women||+78|
|#70 - Can we get a Mega Typhlosion first?||11/15/2013 on I'd actually ask for mega...||0|
|#111 - Congrats on the dubs though. For that, you get this .gif! [+] (1 new reply)||11/15/2013 on Makes JB look like a brick...||+1|
|#108 - No. You have to roll quads. [+] (8 new replies)||11/15/2013 on Makes JB look like a brick...||0|
|#26 - We're getting close to it though, I can just feel it. [+] (19 new replies)||11/14/2013 on I still feel ashamed||+38|
#197 - anonymous poster (11/15/2013) [-]
Am I the only on who thinks that looks like the female reproductive system?
|#24 - Picture [+] (21 new replies)||11/14/2013 on I still feel ashamed||+62|
#197 - anonymous poster (11/15/2013) [-]
Am I the only on who thinks that looks like the female reproductive system?
|#12 - Someone needs to add this at the bottom of the .gif: …||11/14/2013 on Up, Up, and....BAM||+1|
|#47 - You shouldn't be jealous, and here's two words why: …||11/14/2013 on The power of Pokemon||0|
|#66 - Are you absolutely SURE he doesn't have his **** …||11/14/2013 on Get it together aquaman||+2|
|#11 - IT'S A PIKACHU!!! [+] (1 new reply)||11/13/2013 on Haven't unlocked this...||0|
|#48 - Actually, it's a combination of genetics and the environment y…||11/13/2013 on Scumbag DNA||0|
|#95 - I look forward to that...||11/13/2013 on Seems like a nice guy||+1|
|#27 - Fair enough.||11/13/2013 on Dear Admin||-2|
|#6 - This is hitlerious!||11/13/2013 on Only in programming...||+1|
|#17 - Because this is TOTALLY a legit story, right? Wait, w…||11/13/2013 on Family photo||+56|
|#8 - I gotta say, there's been a whole lot of awkwardzombie comics … [+] (1 new reply)||11/13/2013 on Sandviches are metal as fuck||0|
|#24 - The side that causes the most pleasure||11/13/2013 on The Sky is Falling ...||+2|
|#104 - THIS GUY GETS IT||11/13/2013 on TIpunchlineTLE||+2|
|#7 - No prob. I actually was having the same issue before I started…||11/13/2013 on Juicy hot weiners in tight...||0|
|#3 - Right click and then select open link in new tab You'… [+] (2 new replies)||11/12/2013 on Juicy hot weiners in tight...||0|
|#26 - Would someone be willing to throw a bottle full of concrete at… [+] (3 new replies)||11/12/2013 on And the Nobel Piece Prize...||+1|
|#32 - Well, don't forget that rape on males is (are?) also a far mor… [+] (25 new replies)||11/11/2013 on Scumbag Feminist||+8|
#40 - voidherald (11/11/2013) [-]
"Well, don't forget that rape on males is (are?) also a far more than anyone is lead to believe."
This is a very common anti-feminist argument and it's fatal-flaw is that it's not anti-feminist at all. The reason male rape is underreported - even in relation to the rape of women - is partially due to the same reason it's underreported for women (self-blame/victim blaming, feeling dirty, etc.) that feminism is very obviously trying to break down - the other reason is because of an incredibly patriarchal view of masculinity and manhood (not just in a physical power struggle, but also in ability to express emotion) that causes male rape victims to be far less likely to report rape. Feminism is partially about breaking down that view of masculinity. Patriarchy is a system that puts women down, but that doesn't necessarily mean it does a lot for men.
"I think that the issue here is that there are feminists that attack men based on the fact that a half of society have male genitalia. It honestly doesn't make sense why anyone would hold an advantage over any other person based on any particular thing, but that's the way politics work I guess."
I'm kind of confused at to what you're saying here, but I largely think you're subscribing to the far-too-typical idea of the "strawman feminist." The VAST majority of feminists have nothing against 'men', and those that do are often the victims of very traumatic experiences that give them severe trust issues, so you can hardly be mad at them. Feminists are against patriarchy and misogyny, and will call it out where they see it. You don't have to be actively and consciously sexist to promote or perpetuate patriarchal or misogynistic ideals, and I think when men get called out on this we far too often, rather than listen, try and defend our status quo, because we don't think of ourselves as sexists.
#288 - nandaaz (11/12/2013) [-]
voidherald was right about how the vast majority of feminists has nothing against men.
Unfortunately, most of the feminists that you see in the media are loud, hate men, and don't really have a valid reason to be a feminist, other than the fact that they have been wronged once or twice by some dude... That's why it seems like all feminists hate men while in reality only less than 5% of all feminists hate men...
#303 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
Source: I'm a feminist. My friends are feminists (mostly women, 1-2 guys). None of us hate men.
What makes you think you know more about what feminists talk about among themselves than we do? Stop telling feminists what they think and listen to them. That's the whole point of feminsm.
#305 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
Sorry you think your experiences with feminists in the media trump the voiced objections and opinions of real every-day feminists.
Is the irony of ignoring the opinions of women about the feminist movement in favor of a profit-driven male-owned sensationalist media depiction of feminism really lost on you?
#306 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
"Is the irony of ignoring the opinions of women about the feminist movement in favor of a profit-driven male-owned sensationalist media depiction of feminism really lost on you?"
THIS is why I know you are full of shit.
So you might not "HATE" males, but you certainly blame them for majority of your problems! Yes, the problem that people point to the extremist feminists is a result of MALE driven media sensationalism! I'll acknowledge your "movement" (which is based on sexism) once it stops blaming the opposite gender for every inequity.
Beyond that, I have no way of substantiating your claims. I don't know you, (and I have no desire to) and thus I cannot take what you say at your word.
Furthermore, YOU and YOUR friends are not a big enough sample size. Do you claim to speak for all feminists? Considering that most feminists claim to speak and fight for all women, I wouldn't put it past you, honestly.
In addition, the MEDIA is WITH YOU. Feminists and feminism driven agendas are celebrated and advanced in todays media. Don't give me this bullshit about a "male dominated" media, because it clearly isn't true. NYT,The Washington Post, CNN, Huff Post, would never DARE attack feminists or portray them in a negative light.
So my friend, the REAL irony here is that you seemingly don't "hate" men, but somehow blame them for your problems. Think of Nazi Germany! I don't "HATE" the Jews, I just blame them for all of my problems."
Do you honestly understand what you are saying? Is your OWN hypocrisy lost on YOU?
#307 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
Um whoa there dude, I'm male.
And the male-driven is not that males inherently promote sexist media, that's capitalism (read: profit-driven and sensationalist), but rather that it's worth noting that women might not be comfortable with media depictions of feminism if they were in the same position. (Of course, many would - many women would definitely turn down feminist values in favor of profits).
I do agree that portrayal of feminism in the media is improving, but it's a lot worse than you think. I'd recommend you watch the movie Miss Representation, it's crappily edited and produced but the interviews are amazing and it conveys the ways in which media can hurt women very well, especially when it comes to stuff like women in politics.
#308 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
All of my points still stand.
You want to argue economics? Fine. The free market provides the best (and most equitable) opportunity for everyone. Discuss.
Don't be so hasty to don that white armor, buddy. Read some of the shit the people in your "movement" say.
Not quite sure why how women feel (by the way, not all women are feminists! Shocker!) about the representation of feminism in media is relevant, considering that you can do nothing about it other than make your own pro-feminist literature.
To get back to the topic at hand, the woman pictured above got 180k for a bullshit cause. Although SHE might be considered a radical, what about the people who supported her? Do their donations not lend credence to the idea that your movement is radical, or at the very least, support radicals?
#311 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
She's a sensationalist. She's proving sensationalism makes money. She gets media attention by both feminists and anti-feminists, and then feminists are willing to give money to feminists in a polarizing issue. That's the problem - rational feminist opinions get drowned out in sensationalism (from both sides).
Also, I wanted to address a point you had earlier about women blaming men. This is a common misunderstanding, even among feminists. Women blame patriarchy, but that's not the same thing as blaming men. I'm unsure if you're familiar with the concept of the banality of evil, but patriarchy works similarly. Patriarchy does not rely on sexists, it relies on the maintenance of the status quo, which both women and men contribute to. This is why the idea that feminism is unnecessary is toxic - because even without being sexist they're about maintaining the status quo under which women (AND men, for example with the underreporting of male rape statistics, bullying, etc.) suffer. The banality of evil was invented to describe the lack of pin-point-able blame. The point is that it doesn't matter who's to blame, but that things need to change.
#312 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
Here's a question. WHat the fuck is the patriarchy? Can I access a patriarchy database online? THat's weird, I wasn't given a password at birth. Let me guess, is it "itwasmy_privilege," isn't it!
The so-called patriarchy is the go to evil of the feminist movement; its antichrist. Not enough women in film? Patriarchy! Mother didn't get custody of her child? Patriarchy! God forbid, someone disagrees with a female feminist on the internet? Patriarchy!
What exactly needs to change? Men seem to get the raw end of the deal in todays society! They're almost never given full custody of their children, they MAY have to pay child support even when it's unnecessary. You feminists want to do *something* that is never precisely explained to increase the number of women in film and portray them how feminists deem them appropriate, regardless of what the public wants!
The TRUTH is feminists don't want EQUAL rights for women, they want SPECIAL rights for women. Evidenced by the idea that businesses should be required to pay men and women the same, but car insurance companies don't have to charge men and women the same. Evidenced even further by MANY feminist's desire to impose harsh restrictions on any media that doesn't agree with their worldview (ie, Swedens new film rating system).
#313 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
The truth is you should stop telling us what we want, because we know better than you do Mr. Enlightened.
I'm not even sure you read what I wrote. Did you miss the part where I said that patriarchy wasn't just about men, but rather a subtle outcome of modern society caused by both men and women? Did you not read where I said patriarchy hurts men AND women, or did you just choose to ignore it in favor of your preconceived ideas of what feminism is? I would argue that men's inability to obtain custody rights comes from our arbitrary view of gender norms, which feminism is entirely about breaking. It's also worth noting that sure, women get an advantage when it comes to custody rights, but the idea that women are the ones who raise children definitely comes back to bite them in the ass when it comes to trying to get into the workforce as a woman - arbitrary gender norms are bad for everyone involved.
#314 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
"The truth is you should stop telling us what we want, because we know better than you do Mr. Enlightened. "
This is rich, coming from someone who blames a implied gender-inequality on an obscure notion called the patriarchy, which has YET to be described beyond "something that harms both men and women!" In addition, you have YET to attempt to justify the name for this
The patriarchy isn't about men? Is the dictionary definition wrong? I could go through the latin roots with you, if you'd like, but I'm pretty sure that the term "patriarchy "ONLY refers to men.
Furthermore, I have seen NO feminist campaigns to give a father custody rights and SEVERAL to give the mother rights. The feminist movement, however well-intended in it's alleged goal of breaking gender norms seems to only concentrate on the inequalities of one sex - that is, females.
#316 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
You may not have seen a feminist movement on the topic of male custody rights, but you've certainly seen ones that challenge the idea that women are the natural child-rearers in our society - in relation to their place in the work force. I think that's a discussion that would inevitably lead to the discussion of custody rights, where many feminists would concede that there is a definite gender bias based on negatively stereotypical gender norms. I fully encourage you to start a movement against gender norms in parenthood, I just disagree that this movement is anti-Feminist in nature.
#317 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
YOu know, I WOULD start a movement if I thought it would get anywhere with your crowd.
Try it yourself. Propose, in whatever pro-feminist forum, that you support any father who deserves to keep his children, OR the defense of any victim of a false rape allegation. You'll be called things like a misogynist, or a chauvinistic asshole.
#315 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
Again - telling feminists what they mean. Feminists aren't talking about 'a patriarchy' they are talking about 'the patriarchy' - a term that is not the dictionary definition but whose definition is actually under constant revision in feminist thinking and literature and constantly redefining itself.
The best definition I could give in a sentence is an infrastructure in our culture that subtly enforces negative gender norms.
#318 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
Whatever you and your feminist things think the definition of "the patriarchy" is, you STILL have not been able to justify the use of that particular word.
What else, is a word associated with MALES supposed to convey OTHER than a blame of males?
To people NEW to your movement, is it NOT immediately implied by the word "patriarchy" that men are the bane of your movement?
#320 - voidherald (11/13/2013) [-]
I don't disagree that feminists have an image issue but I would argue this has far more to do with the lack of ability for feminist discourse to reach the mainstream than problems inherent with the words themselves. The word has a long etymology from first and second wave feminism that it still connects to, and I don't entirely think it's necessary to abandon it. It's not like modern English isn't chock-full of terms that were once very sexist in nature that we can still accept (Mrs., for example).
#321 - achimp (11/13/2013) [-]
You cannot deny that when the word patriarchy is used it inspires the idea of blaming males, whether that is intended or not. Furthermore, if you actually wanted your movement to be understood you would start a movement to change the name of the feminist anti-christ to something more gender-neutral. However, since the name of your movement, one claimed to be based on sex equality, isn't gender neutral itself I can hardly expect that to happen.
If you truly wanted equality between the sexes AND you wanted your movement to gain a lot of steam and actually make a difference beyond calling men cis gendered misogynist pigs who need to check their privilege, you would call yourself a humanist, or an equalist.
Furthermore, you cannot provide a reasonable explanation as to why the feminist movement, one supposedly based on equality between sexes, continually focuses on issues regarding women.
The feminist movement is inherently sexist. Consider a recent poster campaign; the "don't be that guy" poster campaign. I'm sure you know what it is. In it, males are told not to "be that guy," i n the interest of discouraging daterape, despite the fact that less than 4% percent of men are racists. The poster campaign, rather than encouraging safety among females attempts to instill a notion of a dumb, idiotic male who NEEDS to be told not to rape people.
This poster campaign, BECAUSE it was a poster campaign DOUBTLESSLY received a TON of support from feminists, DESPITE its implication that all males will rape unless told otherwise.
I have shown you how a LARGE part of your movement knowingly supported sexism and you will STILL defend it.
#295 - nandaaz (11/12/2013) [-]
General knowledge, something you obviously don't have...
Muslims have a small percentage that's radical and is known to the world, while the majority is quiet and peacefull.
Christians have a small percentage that wants to force their beliefs on everyone, while the majority is quiet and minds their own buisness.
Every single group has a small percentage that's radical/annoying and well known, and a large percentage that keeps their mouth shut. This makes every group look bad, including feminists.
I can't be arsed right now to go look up a bunch of feminists, because frankly; I don't give a shit. Unless it's someone that wants to help women in 3rd world countries who have a chance of getting stoned every day, I don't care.
#296 - achimp (11/12/2013) [-]
Clearly you give a shit, you're sitting here arguing with me about it. If you TRULY didn't give a shit, you wouldn't be trying so hard to change my opinion.
You're the one who spouted statistics at me! Am I to assume that you pulled the 5% shit out of your ass, hoping I wouldn't call you on it? It is ALSO common knowledge that x amount of whatever group is or isn't radical?
And while yes, the point that there are radical sects of certain groups doesn't mean another group isn't inherently radical. Also consider the fact that the amount of radical Chrstians, or Muslims have been estimated by some sort of logical process beyond "WELL ITS COMMON KNOWLEDGE CHIMP UR STOOPID."
Furthermore, Feminism is inherently sexist, and thus inherently radical. Consider the name "FEMINISM." It implies sexism of itself; seeking the benefits of one sex over another. Therefore, anyone who considers themselves a feminist is either sexist, or incapable of understanding what Feminism really means.
Most feminists probably don't openly hate men, or admit to themselves that they do. However, MOST feminists most likely sympathize with those women who DO hate men, simply because they're women and can relate to other women more. I made a comment a while ago comparing Feminism to Nazism. Sure, not all of the Germans under the Nazi party rule supported the eradication of Jews, but that didn't stop the "few radicals who were the face of the movement" to orchestrate it OR gain power, did it?
|#46 - In jail for stealing the bike. [+] (1 new reply)||11/11/2013 on Best of FJ 2||0|