The problem is, however, Emma is merely stating what all the non celebrity feminists have been stating since forever, the same innaccurate beliefsand jumpin on bandwagons. I mean, come on, how she mentions "I was called bossy" implying that it is due to sexism she was called after this whole "Ban Bossy" thing? Hardly believable, and even if it was true, so what? Feminists are trying to make it seem that when words are used in regards to females that it is due to sexism, that it couldn't possibly be due to how they are acting, such as saying "bitch" is misogyny rather than describing someone who's being, well, a bitch, as in unpleasant and then the bossy thing as if females can't be bossy. Plenty of men have been called bossy at a young age, myself included, and yet they pass the idea that when it happens to women it's because they're women, not because they are being bossy.
Meh, I don't think she's all that intelligent for backing this type of thing and as for her appearance I personally find her average but I can understand others thinking she's very attractive.
I don't know why it would be surprising to hear I am against her speech. She is saying, like I said, the same as every other feminist out there, that they want equality and so on, and yet the feminists that have been saying this for so long have still done nothing about male issues. I am sure you are familiar about the whole "actions speak louder than words" thing? Because sure they say they are for helping men and so on but they haven't "done" anything to help men, and when they do it is a stepping stone to help women, such as when she said "It'll stop men from having to feel controlling and therefor stop women from feeling like they need to be submissive", painting it as if a male problem is men being a problem and women's problems are dealing with problems, even though studies have revealed women are far more likely to be controlling in intimate relationships compared to men. So she is painting a false picture from the truth, that men are controlling and causing problems for women but saying that men being controlling is a male issue to make it seem like they equally care about men's issues, yet so ignorant on how it's the reverse to demonstrate she doesn't care much about male issues.
Men's problems is that they cause problems, women's problems is that they have to deal with men's problems...Even when it's factually incorrect...
And this is what I don't get about feminists. They assume that because men do not express their feelings the way women typically do that they don't express their feelings at all, which is ridiculous. I will agree that men are more likely to hide their feelings but in no way in a general sense do men do this, they simply express them in other ways. Women are far more social compared to men, and so they think that if how they express their feelings work for them then it must be the only way you can express them. Basically, feminists are saying that how men express their feelings isn't expressing their feelings and we have to express them the way women do, even trying to pressure men in to doing it...And another issue is how feminists claim to want men to express their feelins, and yet when men do you have things like "Male tears" and "Mansplaining", products of ridicule for men expressing their feelings...And yet feminists will never address that "they" are taking part in boxing men in and are saying "Stop saying that feminists hate men!" rather than saying "Yes, some feminists hate men and that needs to stop...We must stop these people from boxing men in and maybe as a result men will feel more inclined to not disliking us"...
Another thing I never understood is how feminists seem to think men never talk to other men about their issues...We do. Maybe this is because men do not do it infront of women due to fear of looking weak but they definitely do it with the men they know. For example, my friend, my best friend, most macho-attitude guy you'll come across, or atleast tries to seem that way, split up with his ex. He admits to crying, doesn't know what to do, explains how it makes him feel and so on, and we talk it out, no judgement or anything. He has explained how he has thought about suicide for years now even while he was with his partner and he freely admits his feelings and I express how that makes me feel. I personally believe he's going to commit suicide soon and explained to him that if he done so I wouldn't know what I would do with myself because we are so close. But I digress.
Men are open to other men on their feelins and emotions and assuming they aren't because they don't do it to females is just causing more issues.
I dont support when feminism uses women in other countries to justify their points. Most western feminists do little to nothing about these women, they barely even speak about them unless they are using them to say "see, this is why we need feminism" and then forget all about them. Ok, let's just say women have these issues in other countries more than men have issues in the same places...Why does that have relevance in western civilization? Why aren't feminists primarily focusing on their issues? Because men definitely have more issues here and in western civilization, so even if women do have more issues in these other places that does not justify feminism primarily focusing on women in western civilization's issues over men's issues. Using the women's suffering in these other places just to maintain the group in a place those issues don't take part in so you can focus on small issues in the place feminists are tryin to maintain is using the suffering of others for their own purposes. It's wrong.
Yes, fatherlessness is a male issue, however the route of that problem is family court systems and how they happen behind closed doors. She doesn't mention that, but then again she might of been implying that, and if so, sure, I'll give her that one but one out of everything else doesn't make her accurate.
"How is saying men are imprisoned by gender roles not helping men".
Because they're just words. This is not something new, this has been stated by feminists for years, they still focus on female issues socially over male ones and barely, if ever, focus on male gender roles unless the purpose is on how it harms women. I am not going to sit through hearing feminists for years saying the same thing to justify their group being about equality, to try include men, then do nothing in regards to men then all of a sudden think "Oh, this feminist might actually do something because she's a celebrity even though others have said the exact same and done nothing for males in this aspect".
It's been said too much and nothing has been done about it. Until they "show" me they are doing something to help male issues, I am not going to believe their words.
As for your second last paragraph, again, that would be understandable if it wasn't backwards. Studies have found women more likely to be controlling than men, yet they just assume men are more controlling, which is them restricting men to a gender role by assumption, and so they are saying the opposite of what is true to paint women as victims, otherwise why else would they lie about it?
You're too easily convinced by feminism's pretty words. I am looking at this objectively, yes they say words that can sometimes be seen as wanting equality but stating things that aren't correct and doing nothing to help men even when saying they will isn't seeking equality, it's using the concept of equality to further your own agenda. Even God said he loves all of his children, and yet there is hell.
Emma Watson on Feminism; What are your thoughts?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
The problem is, however, Emma is merely stating what all the non celebrity feminists have been stating since forever, the same innaccurate beliefsand jumpin on bandwagons. I mean, come on, how she mentions "I was called bossy" implying that it is due to sexism she was called after this whole "Ban Bossy" thing? Hardly believable, and even if it was true, so what? Feminists are trying to make it seem that when words are used in regards to females that it is due to sexism, that it couldn't possibly be due to how they are acting, such as saying "bitch" is misogyny rather than describing someone who's being, well, a bitch, as in unpleasant and then the bossy thing as if females can't be bossy. Plenty of men have been called bossy at a young age, myself included, and yet they pass the idea that when it happens to women it's because they're women, not because they are being bossy.
Meh, I don't think she's all that intelligent for backing this type of thing and as for her appearance I personally find her average but I can understand others thinking she's very attractive.
I don't know why it would be surprising to hear I am against her speech. She is saying, like I said, the same as every other feminist out there, that they want equality and so on, and yet the feminists that have been saying this for so long have still done nothing about male issues. I am sure you are familiar about the whole "actions speak louder than words" thing? Because sure they say they are for helping men and so on but they haven't "done" anything to help men, and when they do it is a stepping stone to help women, such as when she said "It'll stop men from having to feel controlling and therefor stop women from feeling like they need to be submissive", painting it as if a male problem is men being a problem and women's problems are dealing with problems, even though studies have revealed women are far more likely to be controlling in intimate relationships compared to men. So she is painting a false picture from the truth, that men are controlling and causing problems for women but saying that men being controlling is a male issue to make it seem like they equally care about men's issues, yet so ignorant on how it's the reverse to demonstrate she doesn't care much about male issues.
Men's problems is that they cause problems, women's problems is that they have to deal with men's problems...Even when it's factually incorrect...
And this is what I don't get about feminists. They assume that because men do not express their feelings the way women typically do that they don't express their feelings at all, which is ridiculous. I will agree that men are more likely to hide their feelings but in no way in a general sense do men do this, they simply express them in other ways. Women are far more social compared to men, and so they think that if how they express their feelings work for them then it must be the only way you can express them. Basically, feminists are saying that how men express their feelings isn't expressing their feelings and we have to express them the way women do, even trying to pressure men in to doing it...And another issue is how feminists claim to want men to express their feelins, and yet when men do you have things like "Male tears" and "Mansplaining", products of ridicule for men expressing their feelings...And yet feminists will never address that "they" are taking part in boxing men in and are saying "Stop saying that feminists hate men!" rather than saying "Yes, some feminists hate men and that needs to stop...We must stop these people from boxing men in and maybe as a result men will feel more inclined to not disliking us"...
Another thing I never understood is how feminists seem to think men never talk to other men about their issues...We do. Maybe this is because men do not do it infront of women due to fear of looking weak but they definitely do it with the men they know. For example, my friend, my best friend, most macho-attitude guy you'll come across, or atleast tries to seem that way, split up with his ex. He admits to crying, doesn't know what to do, explains how it makes him feel and so on, and we talk it out, no judgement or anything. He has explained how he has thought about suicide for years now even while he was with his partner and he freely admits his feelings and I express how that makes me feel. I personally believe he's going to commit suicide soon and explained to him that if he done so I wouldn't know what I would do with myself because we are so close. But I digress.
--
[Old Memory]
9 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Men are open to other men on their feelins and emotions and assuming they aren't because they don't do it to females is just causing more issues.
I dont support when feminism uses women in other countries to justify their points. Most western feminists do little to nothing about these women, they barely even speak about them unless they are using them to say "see, this is why we need feminism" and then forget all about them. Ok, let's just say women have these issues in other countries more than men have issues in the same places...Why does that have relevance in western civilization? Why aren't feminists primarily focusing on their issues? Because men definitely have more issues here and in western civilization, so even if women do have more issues in these other places that does not justify feminism primarily focusing on women in western civilization's issues over men's issues. Using the women's suffering in these other places just to maintain the group in a place those issues don't take part in so you can focus on small issues in the place feminists are tryin to maintain is using the suffering of others for their own purposes. It's wrong.
Yes, fatherlessness is a male issue, however the route of that problem is family court systems and how they happen behind closed doors. She doesn't mention that, but then again she might of been implying that, and if so, sure, I'll give her that one but one out of everything else doesn't make her accurate.
"How is saying men are imprisoned by gender roles not helping men".
Because they're just words. This is not something new, this has been stated by feminists for years, they still focus on female issues socially over male ones and barely, if ever, focus on male gender roles unless the purpose is on how it harms women. I am not going to sit through hearing feminists for years saying the same thing to justify their group being about equality, to try include men, then do nothing in regards to men then all of a sudden think "Oh, this feminist might actually do something because she's a celebrity even though others have said the exact same and done nothing for males in this aspect".
It's been said too much and nothing has been done about it. Until they "show" me they are doing something to help male issues, I am not going to believe their words.
As for your second last paragraph, again, that would be understandable if it wasn't backwards. Studies have found women more likely to be controlling than men, yet they just assume men are more controlling, which is them restricting men to a gender role by assumption, and so they are saying the opposite of what is true to paint women as victims, otherwise why else would they lie about it?
You're too easily convinced by feminism's pretty words. I am looking at this objectively, yes they say words that can sometimes be seen as wanting equality but stating things that aren't correct and doing nothing to help men even when saying they will isn't seeking equality, it's using the concept of equality to further your own agenda. Even God said he loves all of his children, and yet there is hell.