Is it normal to hate females so much that i am embarressed to be one?

The current feminists and a large group of vocal females put their idea's out there as though they are representative of all females. I get so angry to the point I am embarrassed a lot of the time to be a female.

I believe wholeheartedly that sexism doesn't exist in the western world, only lazy people using it as an excuse for not achieving what they had hoped. Females have the same opportunities as men. Sure it is hard sometimes, but that goes equally for men and women. The current 'sexism' mantra implies all women are victims and wants females to be given opportunities simply because they are female, not because it is deserved.

On top of this because politicians can't call out the crazy at the risk of being pegged a sexist, these idiots are getting a powerful voice. How dare they try and makes laws that takes away my choice as a female, the very thing they are fighting for.

Please note I am not referring to third world countries, this is a different issue completely. I would love someone to put forward a convincing argument to the contrary.

Voting Results
45% Normal
Based on 121 votes (54 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 46 )
  • NeuroNeptunian

    If you do not believe sexism exists then I can only assume that you have never attempted to get into a male-dominated career field or course of study.

    As a female mechanic in the Army Reserve, I will tell you that I KNOW sexism exists. The women in these sort of MOS's, despite doing the same amount of work, getting as bloody, hurt and dirty as the men and putting up with the same military horse shit get taken less seriously BECAUSE we are female. Conduct wise, more is expected of us because we are expected to be weak and expected to fail. Why? Oh well women don't belong under the HMMWV. Women don't belong behind a wrench. We are women. We belong behind a desk. Leave the "real work" to the men.

    Even in security, we are seen as inferior. Despite doing the same work, we are treated as if we don't belong in our own uniforms. Despite being exposed to the same risks and performing the same duties, we are treated like we don't belong here because despite our performing the same duties, we are expected to fail.

    After having to put up with so much shit from men who see me as being unfit to do the work that I do, despite my performing my duties properly and as well as they do, I call bullshit on anyone who would say that sexism doesn't exist.

    It exists on both sides. Men who went to work in the HR field in the Army get their fair share of sideways looks and remarks because it's the women who belong behind the desk, not the men. Male rape victims are seen as weak because being a rape victim as a female is a vulnerable position to be in and males can't be "weak". Males who work in female dominated fields are given the same treatment as females in male dominated fields.

    Any sexism that exists towards women exists towards men in the likewise manner. Stop labeling femininity and women as weak. Stop letting women get away with histrionics and entitlement. Sexism towards men AND women will dissipate quickly.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • driedroses

    You sound privileged as fuck.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Please be sarcasm...Please be sarcasm.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • dom180

        Why would it be? Someone who says "sexism doesn't exist" must live in one heck of an ivory tower, and saying that lack of social justice is a made-up excuse for not being successful reeks of snobby, privileged conservatism and disconnection from reality. Even you believe sexism exists - you just debate the direction of it.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • CozmoWank

    What laws take away your choice as a female?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • SuperBenzid

      Many feminists are pro censorship and call for sex negative censorship in particular so that would necessarily lead to females having less opportunities of performance, modelling, etc.

      Also feminism has definitely had an effect on lobbying for stricter laws and the outlawing of prostitution. Whatever my personal feelings on it, that does limit a women's ability to decide who she has sex with and what reason she wants to have sex. It also harms and endangers those who are already at the bottom rungs of society. Frankly the feminists have been particularly awful to the women who needed help the most in this matter.

      Many abortion laws were originally supported by the feminist movement and while they have moved away from that now that was a limit placed on women's freedoms heavily lobbied for by feminists. Getting laws entrenched is easier than their repeal after all. I know it is a divisive issue but it is a limit to freedom regardless of a person's views on it.

      I know in Europe there has been a serious push by feminist groups to make anti-feminist speech a punishable offence. They are particularly pushing for this in the Nordic countries. That would limit women's freedom if they did not agree with feminist principles.

      Those are the ones I can think of but there would be others. Feminism is normally a pretty authoritarian ideology the relies on massive state power to achieve its aims.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • CozmoWank

        Are you the OP?

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • SuperBenzid

          No. Your question just got me thinking.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
            -
          • CozmoWank

            If I were a women I would probably feel a debt of gratitude to feminists. If it weren’t for them women wouldn’t have the right to vote and wouldn’t be in the workforce. They’d be home in the kitchen financially dependent on men.

            Pimps make the choices for their whores and the sex isn't for the benefit of the woman.

            Relying on massive state power to achieve its aims? I guess in a male dominated society there need to be laws to defend equal rights. Even today women still make less for the same work.

            As for your other statements, it seems like you have your info backwards.

            Just an objective view from a guy.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
              -
            • SuperBenzid

              "If I were a women I would probably feel a debt of gratitude to feminists."

              That is a cartoon worldview though. None of the feminists active today were active when those things were an issue. You don't have to support a social movement today because in the past it was useful, also you can accept that some of the objectives were legitimate without having to accept every part of the movement.

              As an example I accept that Irish Catholics in North Ireland previously needed better civil rights but that doesn't mean I support the provisional IRA. Do you propose Irish Catholics should be thankful for them?

              Note: Early feminists did use terrorism, though not to as great a level, so the comparison isn't as out there as it sounds.

              "Pimps make the choices for their whores and the sex isn't for the benefit of the woman."

              Yes when things are illegal then criminals control the trade. Prostitution is legal where I am right now, do you think anyone working a legal job gives their money to some nasty guy? If there was a pimp these prostitutes would just call the police.

              "Even today women still make less for the same work."

              They don't in America. When controlled for like work the department of labor found the difference was 3% between men and women. This 3% was thought to be due to the greater overtime worked by men.

              Feminists mislead people by using aggregate figures. Aggregate figures are useless in some matters, in administrative support female aggregate earnings beat male aggregate earnings by over 400%. Would you feel that this is a sign men are massively discriminated against in that field? I wouldn't.

              "Relying on massive state power to achieve its aims? I guess in a male dominated society there need to be laws to defend equal rights."

              The problem happens when feminists believe they have a right to not be offended. Also a group that approaches an issue from a singular POV cannot know what equal rights is.

              "As for your other statements, it seems like you have your info backwards."

              That isn't much of an argument...

              Comment Hidden ( show )
    • Avant-Garde

      Well, when Romney was trying to get in, the south legalized many laws that seriously infringed on the rights of women and their bodies. They are probably still legalizing that nonsense, but I don't really focus on politics anymore so, I wouldn't know.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • CozmoWank

        I don't think Romney or southern republicans are considered feminists. I would think they are the opposite of feminists.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • "As though they are representative of all females."

    Exactly what I say. A group trying to "force" their representation over the entire female gender, all while claiming they fight for women's right to choose for their own, has always rubbed me in the wrong way. "We fought for your right to choose! So now we get to choose that we represent you now!"
    It's hypocritical. Feminists "actually" believe that the vast majority of women are feminists, and get this, if you don't agree with them, well you are just a dumb person brain-washed in to the "patriarchy" (You have a choice, but ours is right and yours is moronic)...They don't care about women nearly as much as they care about their ideology.

    Just know that the majority are up there with you.

    Once thing I "have" to point out, though, is that "women" and "feminism" are not mutually exclusive. There is nothing wrong with being a woman, so don't extend your hatred of feminism on to hatred of women, most agree with you, as another user above stated about the statistics of self-labeled feminists.

    Sexism does exist, though. Although I would say sexism against men is allowed more-so legally or is more acceptable legally, socially there is sexism on both sides, but again it seems more acceptable when it is applied to men. For example, when Rush Limbaugh called one woman a "slut", he was made as a big boogyman/villain on that alone, however when an angry mob of feminists break laws and violate human rights, all while aggressively aggravating men to prevent freedom of speech and to censor the speech at the Toronto university, the mainstream media seemed to just accept it and not make it an issue. Once man calling a woman a slut is more of an issue that a large group of women breaking laws and human rights to enforce censorship on a speech made to help male victims...

    There's reasons why people such as the woman that "was" a feminist who made the first female victim shelters now oppose feminism.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • CozmoWank

      "when Rush Limbaugh called one woman a "slut", he was made as a big boogyman/villain on that alone, however when an angry mob of feminists break laws and violate human rights, all while aggressively aggravating men to prevent freedom of speech and to censor the speech at the Toronto university, the mainstream media seemed to just accept it and not make it an issue."

      1st- One happened in the US, the other in Canada. Why would the US media cover it? Your comparing apples and oranges.

      2nd-Rush Limbaugh is one of the many unelected leaders/loudmouths for the republican party. Sandra Fluke was a private citizen invited to testify before congress. Limbaugh abused the hell out of his safe, comfortable position behind the microphone to call her a slut on a three day rant. Fluke showed more class and balls than Limbaugh. If your mother, wife, or daughter received that kind of abuse for testifying I'm sure you' have a very different opinion of Limbaugh.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • Are you telling me that feminists in the UK have not taken issues in other countries, in other cultures, and because they are from a different area that not talking about it is not avoiding it...? With that mentality the feminists have no room to speak, nor does the media, of any issue outside of America.

        That being said, the issue came about "Purely" on the "slut" comment, if they took issue with him for other reasons on his beliefs, that is fine, but making an issue that large based on the word "slut" is moronic, especially how they somehow made it that him calling "one" woman a slut somehow made him say it in regards to "all" women, which didn't happen.

        Don't use the "if your mother" excuse, I absolutely hate that. You are trying to use an emotional argument to try and waver my stance, and it says you have only been for for a month or so, so I'll fill you in on the common knowledge: emotional arguments don't work on me.

        That being said, the issue wasn't that he was "justified" in saying it, it was the comparison of two situations where one is on a higher scale of hostility to a certain gender than the other, and yet the one lower on the scale got more attention due to their gender, not the actual situation.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
          -
        • CozmoWank

          Yeah, logic doesn't seem to work well on you either.

          You can rationalize your arguments all you want, they still lack a deeper understanding of the situation.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
            -
          • Ofcourse, ofcourse. The famous "I iz smart, u iz not" line. No, I addressed your points with valid responses. You being too inept to refute them is not the opposition showing incapability to use logic.

            Sorry, but this line is repeated too much by idiots and feminists alike. You think you can just make the conclusion that you are right and I am wrong based on your say so?

            This is you simply unable to refute the response to your response, nothing more. Don't insult my intelligence with your drivel.

            Difference between me and you is that when I seen you are being wrong, I explained why. You, oh, you seem to think stating someone is wrong makes it so. Willing to take part in the discussion when you "thought" your response wouldn't have a rebuttal to go with it, now backing out with no explanation as to why the opposition is wrong while your opposition does just that, all while trying to claim it is the "opposition" in which logic fails on.

            Don't respond to me if you can't be finish what you started. To many of you asshats that are overly confident that seem to think that confidence is justified in their refusal to continue the discussion "they" initiated simply because they can't understand how conversations go.

            Here's some kryptonite for you, K? "Prove I am wrong". I know, right? Fucking crazy, thinking there is need of proof of being right and your opposition wrong...Imbecile.

            Comment Hidden ( show )
              -
            • CozmoWank

              No, the difference between me & you is that you are more interested in being heard than to being open to potentially learning anything.

              Also, I lack the time, patience, and interest to deal with insolent people who like to cloud and muddle issues.

              Just like Limbaugh, when you must resort to name calling you have lost the debate. Try not to be so emotional.

              Comment Hidden ( show )
  • linchpin

    I'm just going to wait here and read ItDuz's comment when it inevitably appears

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • Wait no more!

      Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Ilovethearcticmonkeys

    You need take a long hard look in the mirror and wonder what went wrong in your childhood to make you such a terrible and self deprecating human being. YOU make me embarrassed to be a woman. Watch this.
    http://www.upworthy.com/a-french-film-showing-men-what-being-a-woman-feels-like-kinda?c=ufb2

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Avant-Garde

    This is partly what feminists are trying to fight against; those idiot Republicans who seem so hell bent to thumb their bibles and infringe on women and their rights. No, I don't considered myself to be a feminist. I used to when I was younger, but I think that it was for all of the wrong reasons.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • kelili

    I understand your point of view. Sometimes I get angry at these women too but I'm never ashamed of being a female.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • SuperBenzid

    I don't see a need to be embarrassed. In America only 23% of women self-identify as feminists according to a huffpost/youGov poll and also more women identify feminism as a negative term than a positive one.

    Feminism as a social movement simply does not represent the majority of women, despite its claims.

    I hope that makes you feel a little better.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • bitchez-B-cray

    I know right? being a FEmale and all... I wish I could just go back to the 40s's when women didn't have to worry about "rights" all we had to worry about was if the had dinner right. right?

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • Poolnoodle

    Mommy issues.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • randomperson1000000

    I hate everyone, so of course, my answer to your post is "yes."

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • daydreamer394

    I might be too late, but if you're reading this please kill yourself.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • TheMightyOz

    Be sex positive. It's the solution for BOTH women and men to all this gender crap.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • biaj

    really quickly i just want to point out differing pay levels among 2 groups and their sex.
    White men payed more than everyone
    woman
    black men.
    I learned this statistic in my college course. Though there might be sexism in some places there aren't sexism in all places, similar to racism. But in some areas its more prevalent than others. its not super insanely there bt its also not completely gone. Anyone thats not a white male, and not all white males, are going to be subjected to discriminatory views. i can understand because i dont rly see much sexism, or sexism at all. Maybe someone has experienced it alot more than you and even if it happens if its minor you might not notice it.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
  • thegypsysailor

    Any time a portion of a group castigate another portion of that group, I believe it is wrong and embarrassing.
    For instance, for some women to say that something like pornography degrades women even though women control the industry (and work in it voluntarily), is ludicrous. To say that an unqualified woman must be offered an opportunity for a position, even though she is unqualified for that position, because there aren't enough women in that position, is just plain wrong.
    Equality is not a birthright in most situations, it is something which must be earned.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
      -
    • biaj

      in america equality is a birthright. everyone starts as a blank state as a baby. the more qualified or sometimes lucky person gets the job. qualifications or entitlement to a job arent a birth right, equality is.

      Comment Hidden ( show )
        -
      • thegypsysailor

        Your right, I misqualified my statement, sorry.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
  • I guess I just don't care. Very little about politics interests me so it is easy to distance myself from large, vocal, feminists because I don't care as much as you do.

    Given a different topic, I might respond with your zeal. However, I do not pay attention to feminist news, politics, etc. so do not have any reason to get upset.

    And as for being embarrassed to be a woman? I think that is a little excessive yet understandable. I try to put it in a different frame: I imagine myself being a scientist. And within the scientific community, I think of a vocal group advocating for something weird like the ability for scientists to operate above the law, have no regulations, and so on because that would lead to a cure for cancer. And the small vocal sect dominated everyone else, and anyone who tried to stand in the way would be accused for "stopping the cure for cancer."

    But then not all scientists would think that way and it would indeed be embarrassing being associated with that portion. So I can kind of see your point.

    Sorry if this is confusing. It is late and I need to stop being on IIN when I am sleepy.

    Comment Hidden ( show )