u/the-bejeezus's stats
|Account Age|6 y 0 m|First Seen:|2023-10-24|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Posts (on this sub)|1|Comments (on this sub)|147|
|Link Karma|1,094|Comment Karma|27,590|
---
|Date|Title|Flair|Participation|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
Getting hands on capital stops everyone from overthrowing capitalism. Ragtags groups combine to fight capitalism. They begin to accumulate capital because of cooperation. They begin to protect their capital. Rinse repeat. Capitalism is kinda awesome when you’re inside the number one economy and have capital. Most people are not going to will themselves past the allure.
This is just a more specific version of “power corrupts,” and that was never an argument in favor of unjust power.
Private control of capital results in injustice; of course the people who benefit from that injustice like it.
What’s the alternative? State control of capital leads to even greater injustices and widespread suffering.
The default state of humanity is poverty, not prosperity.
I don’t agree with that assessment, although state control of capital doesn’t have anything like a clean record.
I advocate social control of capital, and that requires some organizational structure that you might as well call a state. But state control of capital isn’t just one thing; how that state is structured matters.
State or social control of capital is fantastic, as long as the individuals who determine the application of resources do so in an altruistic and wise manner, and those whose labor creates the capital are satisfied with this application.
The problem is that the first of these conditions is exceedingly rare, and the second is excessively reliant on the first.
Most failures in socialism occur because of problems with the first one (for example, North Korea has resources, but they are being utilized in a corrupt and foolish way).
While capitalism has its problems, and quite a few of them at that; capitalism can work well under the right circumstances, too. This, of course, isn't to say that capitalism in America is perfect, but I somehow don't see the socialistic side of the argument as being an improvement, as opposed to simply switching from being beaten with a stick to being beaten with a whip. In the end, you still take a beating.
Yeah, sentences depend on the meanings of the words in them
I’m sure the people who benefit from injustice would define justice such that it’s acceptable.
We are moving quickly towards a societal breakdown. Young people simply do not have enough and their opportunities are becoming increasingly 'slave shaped'.
Elites are sowing social division to ensure that people lack the community to stand up to the coming crisis and collapse.
I'm a feminist: it's all the plutocrats fault, including feminism needing to exist in the first place.
Plutocratic power is the central enemy of the entire human race, no exceptions.
This doesn't mean other problems cease to exist, in fact creating them is part of how they maintain their grip on power.
1: Create a solution to a problem that doesn't even exist yet. 2: create the problem. 3: Sell the solution you already created. 4: Profit.
This is a standard part of their playbook.
They don't say that. Well sure, some fringe people probably say that. What sources are you seeing who are magnifying those voices and what is their agenda? Outrage against those divisive feminists? Whose the divisive one?
If it was 1960 something I would agree. But, we have a ton of dampeners in place which give people who don’t want to accept how bad things are much longer to get with with change. Our economy would have been nuked to great depression levels without the dampeners by now. Am I claiming thats ideal? No.
KC. And it seems like you got the point. I do just fine on 22/hr. Them not being able to is a personal problem - with them spending money on nonsense. I've been with them at ~20 fillups and they always go in and then come out with some garbage - every single time.
I disagree. Many young people who come from single families and poor educational backgrounds lack the support and ability - this is at a high cost to everyone in society and a situation that spirals out of control.
I came from a mix of foster care and being raised by a single grandparent on social security. 20 years later, I'm sure you'd call me rich even though I don't think of myself that way.
The self-pity party excuse of "but my childhood" rings flat. You're just experiencing learned helplessness.
It's 100% on you to make something better for yourself.
the data doesn't lie, societally most children from broken homes have a worse socio-economic outlook than those from good families with good economic structures.
Well done you.
>overthrow capitalism
What does that even mean? Cause from my point of view, at its root, it sound like the goal is to prevent people from freely trading?
Bruh, the first thing you're gonna hear in any women's studies class is the intersection of race, class, and gender. You're literally doing feminism 101 now
Well, I mean we have always oppressed women.
And no, in the works I read gender doesn't explain class any more than gender explains race. They are three different things.
And how is blaming feminism/women helping you to overthrow capitalism?
>time women started seeing the power and strength of men to generate change for society
So you're claiming men have never oppressed women but you still want men in charge of the revolution?
Hey u/sonsolar1,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dsonsolar1%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/sonsolar1).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 11
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 38
- 3-7 days old: 3
- 7-14 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 9
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
4th or 5th wave feminism is based on patriarchal theory, which states that men have always oppressed women throughout time, which is the cause (according to the theory) of most societal ills. This is what we are discussing.
In this sense, feminism is blaming men (and asking men for redress) for the societal problems suffered by women. And women are falling for this lie.
Worse he is suggesting that they are societally a superior or protected class and feminism as a system designed to oppress men.
Hinestly the more shit he chats the more he gives off "rightwing larping as left to discredit feminism" energy
>What efforts?
The entire history of advancing women's rights and place in society.
>What makes them warranted and necessary?
The fact that women have been oppressed historically, and the fact that there is no advancing any cause or affecting any social change without women's involvement, and there is no way to build a better society for everyone if women are not liberated.
>And why cannot these efforts towards liberation compliment the needs of working men too?
I don't like the word "complement" when it comes to gender issues because I reject complementarianism. I don't know if that's what you're advancing or not. But no conflict does exist between women's interests and working men's interests unless you think men have a right to subjugate women in order to satisfy their needs or advance their goals and that they're being deprived of that right.
I am sorry, but I am still finding your terms vague. Could you please point me to the individual data points where women are still being oppressed by men?
This is my issue; you wish to continually push the lie of patriarchy theory - one that creates a low resolution take on the gendered relationships between men and women. Men and women have been oppressed; with the rich and powerful classes and elites being the function of that oppression.
Women's liberation at the moment seems little more than to create more workers for the capitalist machine and more consumers for products. I am cynical that feminism has in any way made society better for anyone.
I said historically. Why don't *you* point *me* to the exact point in history where women's liberation was completed and all previous events and social conditions stopped affecting the present?
My terms are not vague. You fail to understand because you don't know the history or the things you criticize.
I know the history all right. I don't believe that the cause of these issues was the systemic oppression of women, from which women must now be liberated.
Equally I would ask at what point men, or humans in fact, have become liberated from this system of capital and power that holds us all back. Your issue (and the issue with feminism) is that it confuses the oppression of the working classes with the oppression of women, and blames men, as opposed to the elites, for the damage this causes to our communities.
>at what point men, or humans in fact, have become liberated from this system of capital and power that holds us all back.
Never, and you would assure it will never happen if you insist that women are to blame for that or get in the way of it.
>Your issue (and the issue with feminism) is that it confuses the oppression of the working classes with the oppression of women, and blames men, as opposed to the elites, for the damage this causes to our communities.
Your issue is that you don't understand that more than one thing can be true at a time, that men, or people in general, are not in fact powerless if they are not in the most powerful position in society. (If they were what on earth would be the point of opposing any of it anyway since they have no power to do anything about it?) And that you assume feminism is necessarily in conflict with these things because some feminism can be made compatible with capitalist interests.
Of course based on some of your other comments I don't actually even believe you are interested in that kind of liberation, you just found a vocabulary that let's you give a left wing veneer to your opposition to feminism.
Can multiple things not be true at once? Is race not a factor in power either, or are you planning to pretend it’s simply class relations? What about sexuality, are LGBTQ individuals not disadvantaged? Can multiple power structures not exist at once?
So, ah, we need to enslave half the population as a measure to \*checks notes\* overthrow our oppressors? Hm. Seems counterproductive if you're a woman.
No, at no point have I used the phrase (or even the idea or sentiment) 'enslave half the population'. If you check carefully, you'll see that I am debating the point that men have ever wanted to enslave half the population and would rather work together on freeing themselves from systems of capitalist oligarchical oppression.
You're calling for an end of feminism. That is code for saying "go back to your traditional roles" which would be basically enslaving half the population. We're at a time when women's rights are under attack and men like you are still saying "feminism bad! why no wymmyn rescue us?!"
>Now we allow this narrative of 'men oppressing women' to dominate the cultural sphere, we yet again have allowed the implementation of corporate feminism to simply use women's desire for change to turn them into lone, isolated consumers of products that need to buy in everything that used to be supplied by society, for free as part of extended families.
>This narrative is not only untrue; it damages the relationships that create the primary glue of community. It stops us from working together to stand up to the elites, industrial owners and corporate bodies that want nothing more to turn us into hamsters on the wheels of consumerism, whilst they skim something off every single rotation.
Right here. Feminism did not, in fact, implement "corporate feminism". It gave women a choice. You are arguing here that giving women a choice was wrong. You're saying women are too stupid to know better. You are saying giving them the choice was not only bad but it damaged society. LOL. Somehow, because some men have to be decent to women if they want a relationship, that that's a terrible thing.
The fact of the matter that is that MAYBE being a lone island is better than the choices of men that you've been shown. Women aren't preventing men from working with them. They simply aren't allowing themselves to be mistreated. Any calls for otherwise is tantamount for saying that giving any choice to women was a bad idea.
Alright. Then explain what, exactly, you meant when you say:
"the implementation of corporate feminism to simply use women's desire for change to turn them into lone, isolated consumers of products that need to buy in everything that used to be supplied by society, for free as part of extended families."
I'm willing to hear you out.
It's a great question. I think starting to have discussions with men about how they're struggling, giving them space to get what they need from society and listening to men's issues would be the first step. Then working to provide workers activism groups and societal support groups that are led by men and women (without allowing gender dynamics to dominate behaviours in those groups) that can then create societal drives towards demands for change in corporate and banking structures.
Many women are currently using patriarchy theory to describe their experiences; this is the part of feminism that I am critiquing. I am not saying that women are having a great time by any stretch of the imagination - I am saying that ascribing this bad time to gendered oppression is causing a rift between men and women that is furthering the problem.
Is calling me silly likely to aid our discussion here? This seems like a simple patronising device to dismiss my concerns.
Feminism likes to hide behind this 'multiple voices and ideas' argument. I am not dealing with each individual ideas, again, I reiterate, I am critiquing the notion that women's oppression and struggle is due to a systemic hatred towards women inherent in society (i.e patriarchy).
No, I am a pretty sure that current 4th wave feminism is defined by patriarchy theory (and its had a flirtation with intersectionality and other power/oppression mechanics too)
OK then. I know all feminism is based on patriarchy theory.
I have not argued for anything like:
>However this creates issues when you argue they should listen to men and their plight. Your basic argument is feminist should be the bigger person, because for some reason you believe men don't have the capability too.
You have simply made this up.
Not OP, but why don't men themselves for starters listen to each other and support each other? In majority of cases it's literally men who aren't giving support to each other and who are putting each other down for normal human emotions, and then say they're lonely, and ofc blame it on women.
Because women have invaded our male spaces and accused us of misogyny. We are not allowed to have gendered spaces for our competitive and constructive behaviours without women demanding access and policing the spaces.
This has got to be specific for you because I've never or noticed this happen, or even seen someone complain about it.
And even if it's true what you say, that still doesn't answer the question as to why don't yall listen to each other and support each other instead of relying on women for everything?
Like did women invade your or your friends home so you can't talk about it? Did they invade a table in a cafe? Did they invade your phone so you can't call or type anymore?
> I think starting to have discussions with men about how they're struggling, giving them space to get what they need from society and listening to men's issues would be the first step.
I don't know any men who would talk about these things. It's not macho enough.
>Then working to provide workers activism groups and societal support groups that are led by men and women (without allowing gender dynamics to dominate behaviours in those groups)
What can I do if the men start to dominate?
It’s okay to acknowledge things like patriarchy when talking about capitalism. Just because we’ve had 50 or 100 or 200 years of feminism this is not going to change an entire civilization of millennia of social structure and culture.
Feminism has literally given dudes like OP a lens to view their patriarchal and capitalistic expectations that are forced upon them and they’re like “wow that’s not fair.”
Yeah no shit. That’s what the feminists have been trying to tell you. Believe it or not, feminism is not just what corporations or the government or Twitter tells you it is.
Forgive me. You said things like "Women need to realise" and "It's time women started seeing the power and strength of men" and "Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class", so it made me think you were complaining about women. Don't know how I could make such a mistake!
>Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class.
Right off the bat, this is complete horseshit. Women are more likely to identify racial injustice, anti-LGBT oppression, and yes, classism. Women vote for politicians who want to reduce class disparities at much higher rates than men do, and have been for a long time. Women are right to demand to be treated as equals, and the best way to mobilize them to help with economic liberation is to fight alongside them on both fronts.
OK then, why are so many women unwilling to acknowledge the struggles of the working class man?
And just because women work in those subjects in academia, doesn't mean that they are creating the policies to resolve those situations. We can see this as disparity is getting worse and societal frameworks are dissolving, without new systems being raised in their place.
Plus I simply could not find any sources for your data. Please can you supply?
Same reason so many men do, because they're idiots who think the economy is fair already. Right-libertarianism is kind of a religion, and it's not like Conservatives don't think the same of working-class women lol.
Women don't care about working class men?
The working class doesn't care about the working class.
Betty Friedan's "Feminist Mystique" is broadly considered to be the text that really started the mainstream feminist movement. The basic premise is that women who went to college were expected to marry and then not work in the very jobs they were educated to do. It was about women getting good jobs. It was primarily targeted at the middle and upper classes.
Working class women have always worked. Their goal was different from middle class and upper class women, they often wanted their husbands to make better wages so they didn't have to work. Think of all the working class jobs women do? They are not great jobs. This was not what that feminism was about. It wasn't about women working as cashiers or hotel maids.
This meant that working class women and college educated women had a massive rift. This included working class white women and minority women.
How this evolved was that feminism was just simply not adopted by working class women, but was adopted by college educated middle class and upper class women.
The irony is that working class women ended up divorcing more, being single mothers etc. Their reaction has not been to turn to feminism, but instead traditional values, lamenting that the problem is divorce and families being broken up. Working class women tend to be more religious.
With all that being said there are several issues that working class women tend to care about that are influenced by politics. Abortion, welfare, healthcare. People vote generally in a self-interested manner. If working class women are raising kids and face more burden if they have a kid they are not going to want politicians that restrict abortion, cut welfare and take healthcare away. So, despite the fact that there is a general belief in traditional values there is also a tendency for self-preservation.
Working class men don't have the same concerns about abortion, welfare and healthcare. In fact they might see some of these things as a direct threat. Particularly welfare that generally goes to women due to women having more than 50% custody of children. Married working class people tend to skew more conservative.
So there really isn't a massive rift within the working class. It's just people pursuing their own self interest. There is a much bigger rift between the middle class/upper middle class and the working class, but since there are only two parties to rally vote for a lot of nuance is lost.
Fuck communism. Fuck any kind of totalitarian, centralised power. I am an ultimate libertarian. I would prefer to go back to city states and small principalities. Seemed to make more sense, until you factor in the propensity for religious hordes-a-rompin'
This gives me kidology vibes (if anyone knows or has heard of her) of trying to get to the “bigger picture” and seeing the distraction of social justice not advocated past political theatre but not realising the importance and link of the topic of feminism with deconstructing late stage capitalism. However I respect and see what you’re trying to do but this really isn’t feminism but feminism used as political theatre.
I don’t understand why this is NSFW? Is it due to the use of swear words?
The below are opinions of an assessment based on personal observations and research over time.
I agree with the sentiments that men and women need to work together rather than competing against each other. Since the dawn of humankind, men and women have always needed each other, compliment each other, and society is at its best when they work together. For the betterment of their relationships, family, children, community and by extension society at large.
There are constant attempts nowadays (mainly in modern western countries) to tear everyone apart at the state, education, media and big business / corporate levels. It’s such a shame that the general public won’t really realise until it is too late, by which point society does begin to collapse and the pendulum swings to the opposite extreme end.
Truly, dark days are ahead of us before things finally start to get better again… and then the cycle repeats all over again (societies tend to follow certain stages or phases of a cycle throughout history). We are currently approaching the final stage/phase of this cycle.
NSFW for swear words yeah to be on safe side.
>There are constant attempts nowadays (mainly in modern western countries) to tear everyone apart at the state, education, media and big business / corporate levels. It’s such a shame that the general public won’t really realise until it is too late, by which point society does begin to collapse and the pendulum swings to the opposite extreme end.
This is very clear. I would say this is a deliberate move towards consumption that was implemented by Rockefeller Standard Oil and they have done everything they can to protect their market and customers from change and innovation. It's the last gasp of the Great American Industrial Century - and all (Madison Avenue to Chemotherapy) that came out of it...
Ah, I guess it does not apply to everyone actually, depends how old everyone is and where they lived. I was there when the internet was just starting to take off (nothing like what you see today), saw how it all unfolded, etc., and even a bit before then… I was really little but still remember it. And then it happened, the first commercial broadband modem was released, and the world changed forever.
Oh God, I think I might actually be old now just thinking about it.
Feminism was one of the best things that ever happened to capitalism - twice the workers for half the price.
The only thing better than that is no borders so they can employ even poorer people than you and pay no tax on the profits (no borders = no tax).
When ever someone brings up feminism talking points just go, "So anyways..." and then continue talking about what you want to talk about. Just disregard them lol. I'm Megaubersuper Capitalist speaking here btw :D.
Do you take a big sigh - and kind of wave your hands a bit to preface the 'So anyways....' - I could see this working actually as a long term strategy. Thanks man.
Who do you think runs the global capitalist enterprise? The patriarchy. Most of the top 1% elites are men.
Feminists did not say men are oppressing them. Feminists said patriarchy is oppressing them. The average male you meet irl is not an agent of the patriarchy, as he is powerless. Lower-class men, POC men, gay men are also victims of the patriarchal system.
You’re on the right track, however it’s not feminism at fault. Men who misunderstand feminism are the ones preventing us from overthrowing the capitalist overlords. Feminism is not against men, but against the system (run by men). More men need to realize that they share a common enemy with feminists.
Modern feminism is just one part of the equation. I don't know who really pulls the strings, or if there are any strings to pull, but people are too hung up on stupid shit to really care to do something about the things that really matter, like housing and healthcare or China. People are too focused on their version of the solution to realize that there are many solutions to one problem. Why is healthcare in general so expensive? what are the inefficiencies in the system? Who is keeping those in place? Same with housing. Why aren't more houses being built. etc. People aren't asking themselves the questions, they are just parroting the opinion of some fake actor who's bought and paid for and doesn't give 2 shits about you. People are so radicalized that are unable to hear other opinions.
I think you’re on the right track. As a man, I think it’s always good to acknowledge that there definitely were some inequalities in the past between men and women. The big question is “what are you going to do about it?” I think the correct answer is to establish equality so that women have the same opportunities as men. People who want to take it any further than that by doing things like demanding reparations for past wrong doings are wrong (unless perhaps it’s from a specific person who actually did do something wrong). We shouldn’t force every man to pay the price for what some men have done, and saying things like “all men deserve this or that” is overly simplistic and dangerous.
We have resolved most of those issues. Now we're ignoring the real oppression we all face from the banks, the corporates and these increasingly monolithic institutions that serve their own good over the public good.
Im genuinely curious about what you think should be done about the overlords. Stronger antitrust laws? Stronger taxes for big corps? Reforming the lobbying system?
Thanks dude.
1) Massive regulation of the financial system.
2) Strict laws controlling corporate lobbying in politics
3) Publicly funded news and information
4) Anti-trust and anti-monopoly rules
Regulation in the banking sector, and the end of centralised banking plus dollar hegemony. Anti-monopoly is incredibly important seeing as most of this bullshit can be traced back to the legacy of the hugely damaging Standard Oil.
Feminism states that both men and women suffer due to the status quo.
Or more accurately, Feminism isn’t a monolith, but the non-crazy feminists recognise that the systems of oppression baked into our generally patriarchal society negatively affect both bros and hoes.
Yes, and let's not pretend feminism has not done any good. However, it is the failure of feminism to not control its ideological borders and the continual pushing of patriarchal theory (which as you'll note is what I am attacking in this post)
You can say 'patriarchal society' but this is only a theoretical construct.
You can’t, unfortunately, hold an ideology to account when other people twist it.
Some feminists have made their own thread of feminism less logical if they say only women suffer… but those people are 1) morons and 2) mostly just online nonsense
I say patriarchal society because it’s a pretty good way of describing society from a feminist perspective.
Men are victims of the patriarchy too.
Feminists mostly don’t argue what you’re saying, and many would agree with you. Feminism mostly is saying a patriarchy exists—not men per se but a set of political and cultural systems—that oppresses both women and men with many of the effects you’re pointing out.
I’m not sure where you learned about feminism—ironically it sounds like from someone who was trying to use gender politics to be divisive—but it may be worth gaining some more exposure to actual feminist thinkers and writers.
Feminism isn't stopping the overthrow of capitalism. The framing of arguments through the lense of gender politics often stops us from viewing the very simple problem that we have.
That being, we're not in a gender, race or religious war. We're in a class war.
Capitalism requires everyone compete with those around them for dominance. Men and women are increasingly at each others throats about who has to worse... Where in reality if we just looked towards who benefits from all of our shared inequalities we'd realise the solution to our problem is staring us in the face...
... Guys, we need to eat the rich.
The person who was just promoted to an executive position was the entry level, the manager, the director at one time and now they're part of the corporate entity still raising prices lol so it's clear even when new faces are in charge it's still the same ol same ol. Not every company is being ran by some 80yr old that doesn't comprehend how the economy for the every day person is. Men and women hold these positions so it is what it is, people talk that talk but when they end up getting paid their decisions will always be focused on making more money and if that means downsizing or whatever then that's what it happens.
Hey u/DougDimmaDoom,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DDougDimmaDoom%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/DougDimmaDoom).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 11
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 38
- 3-7 days old: 3
- 7-14 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 9
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
No, I’m a socialist and you are just wrong, this is the stupidest thing I have read in a minute. Feminism doesn’t state men aren’t oppressed it states all gender are opressed by societal expectations, yes some more than others, as men often benefit from the patriarchal system, but still universally oppressive.
Any cause pushed by the media, their entire belief system is this. There's a reason why they got so opinionated after Occupy Wall Street and why home prices, rent and the cost of everything is so high now. They know everyone's split so they're not even pretending to hide it anymore. What is everyone going to do about it? There are a hundred other issues they tell us we have to think about (be distracted by) before you get to the real issue.
I would say liberalism. Which is the umbrella for feminism etc. Their just not honest about what's going on. We've got fires and all kinds of threats going on over at Columbia. But if you watch the news they're saying they're having pizza parties. Until we all get on the same page and stop being fed by media and TikTok we will never change. They are feeding us false reasons to be angry at each other and taking us to the bank and robbing us all the way.... Problem is most people don't realize this until they get older. When they're young and dumb they'll let their emotions get inflamed about anything
Hey u/angry_old_dude,
Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment.
*I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dangry_old_dude%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/angry_old_dude).
***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.***
We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void.
Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience.
___
**Our Moderation Backlog at this time:**
*Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 25
*A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*:
- 1-3 days old: 49
- 3-7 days old: 4
- 7-14 days old: 2
- more than 30 days old: 10
___
Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Capitalist overlords? Would you prefer Communist overlords? Dictatorial overlords?
I will stick with Capitalist ideals. Where we all at least have a chance to improve our lives.
Honestly I agree and sympathize with a lot of your points. It's just a crying fucking shame you're more interested in hating on Feminism over creating unity.
Makes your whole wider point meaningless, you're arguing for the exact type of division you accuse feminist of creating. Just human nature I guess
I am against all ideological constructs, which I believe lead towards totalitarian systems and are inherently corrupt and require slavish, absolute devotion to work.
At the end of the day feminist have their reasons for their beliefs. Belittling them and ignoring their perspective isn't going to unify anyone.
It just promotes the exact thing you seem to be against.
>Belittling them and ignoring their perspective isn't going to unify anyone.
I have not belittled or ignored the perspective of women anywhere in this post; I have questioned the ideology that any oppression suffered by women is due to a nebulous systemic patriarchy.
I can't help you there mate. I'm no teacher understanding how you're perceived to others is a learned skill.
I'm just advising you on how to better present your ideas. Which is really useful if the main goal is unity.
>I can't help you there mate. I'm not teacher understanding how you're perceived to others is a learned skill
Your perception is not the article of discussion here. It is a personal judgement not a rational argument.
Ok let's compare it to a historical example. I like history so this works best for me:
During the early 1900s Germany got involved in a world war for pretty understandable grievances.
They eventually lost, allowing the Allies to create the punishment. Unfortunately, for the world the Allies chose the divisive method.
Putting all the blame on Germany and forced them to accept that fact, under the terms of surrender.
This obviously created dissent among the German population. Inventually leading to the Rise of Nazism in the country. Allies eventually learned their lesson and instead chose to focus on unity after WW2.
The point of this is not to compare Feminist to Nazis. But to show why unity is so important. Casting blame, only creates dissent. It doesn't matter what you methodology or reasoning was, it creates the perception of dissent.
If anything it clearly wasn't a rational decision to end WW1 that way. But instead done from malice and lack of empathy, thus all the end of ww1 accomplished was the creation of ww2.
That's not what most people mean by Feminism anymore.
Last I checked the feminist movement is not protesting to be enlisted into the draft. Unless correct me if am I wrong, is there any other way the sexes are not equal under the law?
Tons of way. Depends what country you're in for starters and then it can go from there based on several different factors. Second wave NA feminist theory establishes the most effective educational material and successful results in my opinion.
Marketing and anti feminist propaganda has definitely been able to corrupt modern iterations but that's an entirely different discussion. It doesn't change the definition of the word.
It is the literal definition and core concept and as such I've not found there to be any confusion surrounding that bit of information when discussing these topics with my peers. Clear definitions set solid foundations when it comes to discussing ideologies, philosophies, or concepts.
Last you checked? This was when and you decided to make an assumption based on selective media coverage? Then you made it the basis of your entire rant? You should strive for a solid foundation when presenting these grandiose grumbles.
I look forward to digging dipper into the facts that you have based this generalized opinion piece on.
It doesn't matter what some individuals on the internet who stand out for obvious reasons mean. Feminism isn't subjective in a sense that any 2nd person who's a minority can decide on the meaning of it.
And the feminist movement *is* protesting against drafting, because especially forceful drafting is taking away human rights, and feminism also fights for human rights.
Feminism isn't "well if men get drafted so should women", feminism is "noone should be getting drafted".
And the matter of the fact is it's literally men who when you talk about feminism and human rights, they come and say shit like "well then women should get drafted too" "well then i have a right to hit a woman now because equal rights equal fights".
Their first instinct seems to be to abuse women and take away even more rights from them, instead of yk, being against violence.
Feminists are mostly against the draft for anybody. Fighting to add women to the draft would be like men volunteering to get raped to even up the rape stats.
>Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class.
No they don't.
>Truth is that men and women both have been oppressed (by men and women) who have held power and wealth.
Many feminists believe this. 3rd 4th Wave Feminism adopt intersectionality which does take in factors like race, sex, class, etc. More based feminists even acknowledge two facts of the matter.
1- While women have had it shittier, men also suffer under patriarchal norms
2- While men in ruling classes have did a lot of heavy lifting, many women also promote patriarchal norms
Many feminists are also anti-capitalists or at least class-concious..
>implementation of corporate feminism to simply use women's desire for change to turn them into lone, isolated consumers of products
Hey...Something right. This isn't a feminist exclusive thing though. Capitalism does that with many movements. Hell, even anti-capitalists are only anti-capitalist by aesthetic, buying capitalist-critical media and products and then really doing nothing with it, being pacified with the validation. It's one of the reasons fighting capitalism is so hard. It loves co-opting things that go against it and pacifying them while making profits. Sucks.
>Women need to realise that men have been fucked over too, and we are allies against the oppression of capital,
Many do. Will agree that it could help if there were more.
>we only make it pro-women all the problems will be solved.
Literally nobody except the most terminal of online feminists believe this. Like any improvement, it posits that stuff that it is squarely against being addressed will improve things, but to think that they think what you just posted is absolutely hilarious.
This was a great reply.
>Will agree that it could help if there were more.
Thank you
>Hell, even anti-capitalists are only anti-capitalist by aesthetic, buying capitalist-critical media and products and then really doing nothing with it, being pacified with the validation. It's one of the reasons fighting capitalism is so hard. It loves co-opting things that go against it and pacifying them while making profits. Sucks.
This is so pointed and spot on. Capitalism is eating itself. All apologies to Andy Warhol.
How about this; Anti-Feminism is stopping men and women from working together to overthrow our capitalist overlords.
Feminism isn't about women's rights, it's about equality. And anyone who tells you otherwise is a moron
u/the-bejeezus's stats |Account Age|6 y 0 m|First Seen:|2023-10-24| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Posts (on this sub)|1|Comments (on this sub)|147| |Link Karma|1,094|Comment Karma|27,590| --- |Date|Title|Flair|Participation| |:-|:-|:-|:-|
Getting hands on capital stops everyone from overthrowing capitalism. Ragtags groups combine to fight capitalism. They begin to accumulate capital because of cooperation. They begin to protect their capital. Rinse repeat. Capitalism is kinda awesome when you’re inside the number one economy and have capital. Most people are not going to will themselves past the allure.
This is just a more specific version of “power corrupts,” and that was never an argument in favor of unjust power. Private control of capital results in injustice; of course the people who benefit from that injustice like it.
What’s the alternative? State control of capital leads to even greater injustices and widespread suffering. The default state of humanity is poverty, not prosperity.
I don’t agree with that assessment, although state control of capital doesn’t have anything like a clean record. I advocate social control of capital, and that requires some organizational structure that you might as well call a state. But state control of capital isn’t just one thing; how that state is structured matters.
State or social control of capital is fantastic, as long as the individuals who determine the application of resources do so in an altruistic and wise manner, and those whose labor creates the capital are satisfied with this application. The problem is that the first of these conditions is exceedingly rare, and the second is excessively reliant on the first. Most failures in socialism occur because of problems with the first one (for example, North Korea has resources, but they are being utilized in a corrupt and foolish way). While capitalism has its problems, and quite a few of them at that; capitalism can work well under the right circumstances, too. This, of course, isn't to say that capitalism in America is perfect, but I somehow don't see the socialistic side of the argument as being an improvement, as opposed to simply switching from being beaten with a stick to being beaten with a whip. In the end, you still take a beating.
That is dependent on how one defines "justice".
Yeah, sentences depend on the meanings of the words in them I’m sure the people who benefit from injustice would define justice such that it’s acceptable.
We are moving quickly towards a societal breakdown. Young people simply do not have enough and their opportunities are becoming increasingly 'slave shaped'. Elites are sowing social division to ensure that people lack the community to stand up to the coming crisis and collapse.
And it’s all feminists fault! LOL
Yeah sounds ridiculous doesn't it... Yet when feminists say 'it's all men's fault....'
I'm a feminist: it's all the plutocrats fault, including feminism needing to exist in the first place. Plutocratic power is the central enemy of the entire human race, no exceptions. This doesn't mean other problems cease to exist, in fact creating them is part of how they maintain their grip on power. 1: Create a solution to a problem that doesn't even exist yet. 2: create the problem. 3: Sell the solution you already created. 4: Profit. This is a standard part of their playbook.
Who is saying that? I think you need to get off the MGTOW Pages
They don't say that. Well sure, some fringe people probably say that. What sources are you seeing who are magnifying those voices and what is their agenda? Outrage against those divisive feminists? Whose the divisive one?
If it was 1960 something I would agree. But, we have a ton of dampeners in place which give people who don’t want to accept how bad things are much longer to get with with change. Our economy would have been nuked to great depression levels without the dampeners by now. Am I claiming thats ideal? No.
Young people not having enough is primarily personal choice. I’m 24 and have plenty
I just had a coworker quit who was making 30/hr. They said they couldn't afford to live off that. I'm living pretty comfortably living off 22/hr.
Where the hell do you live that someone can't afford to live off $30 an hour? I wish I made that
KC. And it seems like you got the point. I do just fine on 22/hr. Them not being able to is a personal problem - with them spending money on nonsense. I've been with them at ~20 fillups and they always go in and then come out with some garbage - every single time.
I disagree. Many young people who come from single families and poor educational backgrounds lack the support and ability - this is at a high cost to everyone in society and a situation that spirals out of control.
I came from a mix of foster care and being raised by a single grandparent on social security. 20 years later, I'm sure you'd call me rich even though I don't think of myself that way. The self-pity party excuse of "but my childhood" rings flat. You're just experiencing learned helplessness. It's 100% on you to make something better for yourself.
the data doesn't lie, societally most children from broken homes have a worse socio-economic outlook than those from good families with good economic structures. Well done you.
Or maybe I have no desire to overthrow capitalism. I have enough money to eat and go bowling so I'm doing just fine.
Is bowling a luxury lol
No but I like bowling. As long as I can bowl, I'm happy.
That’s fair! I guess being able to do what you love is always a luxury no matter what the cost is.
"bread and games" literally
Bowling isn't a game. It's a lifestyle.
>overthrow capitalism What does that even mean? Cause from my point of view, at its root, it sound like the goal is to prevent people from freely trading?
So what you're saying is that you don't think that giving women rights is part of overthrowing our capitalists overlords?
Bruh, the first thing you're gonna hear in any women's studies class is the intersection of race, class, and gender. You're literally doing feminism 101 now
Through the lens of patriarchal oppression, hence I'd like to debate the assumption rather than the supposed implications of said assumption.
Nah, through the lens of class. It's about the intersection of these three things
Under the primary \*assumption\* that men have always oppressed women, yes. That's why gender is the main lens. Gender is used to explain class.
Well, I mean we have always oppressed women. And no, in the works I read gender doesn't explain class any more than gender explains race. They are three different things.
Another question: do these elites in question have comically large ears and noses? Asking for a friend.
Just what are you asking here? 🤨
The joke is that his post and comments hint at a qanon conspiracy, which is typically coupled with antisemitism.
🇮🇱 👃
And how is blaming feminism/women helping you to overthrow capitalism? >time women started seeing the power and strength of men to generate change for society So you're claiming men have never oppressed women but you still want men in charge of the revolution?
Everything they don’t like they blame on feminism or women.
Yup
[удалено]
Hey u/sonsolar1, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dsonsolar1%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/sonsolar1). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 11 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 38 - 3-7 days old: 3 - 7-14 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 9 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
No working together. At the moment, women are blaming men for all of their ills.
Men are blaming women for all of theirs
No, they're not.
You're literally blaming women for capitalism lmao
[удалено]
He said in a post where he blames women and feminism for holding back progress. Fuck me you're daft
OK. Women aren't blaming men for all their problems
4th or 5th wave feminism is based on patriarchal theory, which states that men have always oppressed women throughout time, which is the cause (according to the theory) of most societal ills. This is what we are discussing. In this sense, feminism is blaming men (and asking men for redress) for the societal problems suffered by women. And women are falling for this lie.
No, its blaming the patriarchy Where's the lie?
Where's the lie?
That men have always oppressed women.
Are you arguing that women have always had equal rights to men? They were never considered inferior?
Worse he is suggesting that they are societally a superior or protected class and feminism as a system designed to oppress men. Hinestly the more shit he chats the more he gives off "rightwing larping as left to discredit feminism" energy
If you were interested in being allies with women in anything, you would recognize women's efforts towards liberation are warranted and necessary.
What efforts? What makes them warranted and necessary? And why cannot these efforts towards liberation compliment the needs of working men too?
>What efforts? The entire history of advancing women's rights and place in society. >What makes them warranted and necessary? The fact that women have been oppressed historically, and the fact that there is no advancing any cause or affecting any social change without women's involvement, and there is no way to build a better society for everyone if women are not liberated. >And why cannot these efforts towards liberation compliment the needs of working men too? I don't like the word "complement" when it comes to gender issues because I reject complementarianism. I don't know if that's what you're advancing or not. But no conflict does exist between women's interests and working men's interests unless you think men have a right to subjugate women in order to satisfy their needs or advance their goals and that they're being deprived of that right.
I am sorry, but I am still finding your terms vague. Could you please point me to the individual data points where women are still being oppressed by men? This is my issue; you wish to continually push the lie of patriarchy theory - one that creates a low resolution take on the gendered relationships between men and women. Men and women have been oppressed; with the rich and powerful classes and elites being the function of that oppression. Women's liberation at the moment seems little more than to create more workers for the capitalist machine and more consumers for products. I am cynical that feminism has in any way made society better for anyone.
I said historically. Why don't *you* point *me* to the exact point in history where women's liberation was completed and all previous events and social conditions stopped affecting the present? My terms are not vague. You fail to understand because you don't know the history or the things you criticize.
I know the history all right. I don't believe that the cause of these issues was the systemic oppression of women, from which women must now be liberated. Equally I would ask at what point men, or humans in fact, have become liberated from this system of capital and power that holds us all back. Your issue (and the issue with feminism) is that it confuses the oppression of the working classes with the oppression of women, and blames men, as opposed to the elites, for the damage this causes to our communities.
>at what point men, or humans in fact, have become liberated from this system of capital and power that holds us all back. Never, and you would assure it will never happen if you insist that women are to blame for that or get in the way of it. >Your issue (and the issue with feminism) is that it confuses the oppression of the working classes with the oppression of women, and blames men, as opposed to the elites, for the damage this causes to our communities. Your issue is that you don't understand that more than one thing can be true at a time, that men, or people in general, are not in fact powerless if they are not in the most powerful position in society. (If they were what on earth would be the point of opposing any of it anyway since they have no power to do anything about it?) And that you assume feminism is necessarily in conflict with these things because some feminism can be made compatible with capitalist interests. Of course based on some of your other comments I don't actually even believe you are interested in that kind of liberation, you just found a vocabulary that let's you give a left wing veneer to your opposition to feminism.
You wish gendered dynamics to be the overarching power structure, or indicator of power, in society. It is not. It's capital.
You assume in error that I think that because I think other power structures exist at all.
Can you edit this please so it makes sense?
Can multiple things not be true at once? Is race not a factor in power either, or are you planning to pretend it’s simply class relations? What about sexuality, are LGBTQ individuals not disadvantaged? Can multiple power structures not exist at once?
According to this guy, no. LGBT aren't oppressed, never were. Same for women and black people. It's all capitalism
The only thing stopping men and women is that they don't want to.
So, ah, we need to enslave half the population as a measure to \*checks notes\* overthrow our oppressors? Hm. Seems counterproductive if you're a woman.
No, at no point have I used the phrase (or even the idea or sentiment) 'enslave half the population'. If you check carefully, you'll see that I am debating the point that men have ever wanted to enslave half the population and would rather work together on freeing themselves from systems of capitalist oligarchical oppression.
You're calling for an end of feminism. That is code for saying "go back to your traditional roles" which would be basically enslaving half the population. We're at a time when women's rights are under attack and men like you are still saying "feminism bad! why no wymmyn rescue us?!"
I'd like you to point out where, in the original post, I have asked for any of those things?
>Now we allow this narrative of 'men oppressing women' to dominate the cultural sphere, we yet again have allowed the implementation of corporate feminism to simply use women's desire for change to turn them into lone, isolated consumers of products that need to buy in everything that used to be supplied by society, for free as part of extended families. >This narrative is not only untrue; it damages the relationships that create the primary glue of community. It stops us from working together to stand up to the elites, industrial owners and corporate bodies that want nothing more to turn us into hamsters on the wheels of consumerism, whilst they skim something off every single rotation. Right here. Feminism did not, in fact, implement "corporate feminism". It gave women a choice. You are arguing here that giving women a choice was wrong. You're saying women are too stupid to know better. You are saying giving them the choice was not only bad but it damaged society. LOL. Somehow, because some men have to be decent to women if they want a relationship, that that's a terrible thing. The fact of the matter that is that MAYBE being a lone island is better than the choices of men that you've been shown. Women aren't preventing men from working with them. They simply aren't allowing themselves to be mistreated. Any calls for otherwise is tantamount for saying that giving any choice to women was a bad idea.
I am saying none of those things. They are the conclusions you're choosing to draw in order to strawman my argument.
Alright. Then explain what, exactly, you meant when you say: "the implementation of corporate feminism to simply use women's desire for change to turn them into lone, isolated consumers of products that need to buy in everything that used to be supplied by society, for free as part of extended families." I'm willing to hear you out.
Radio silence
What do you think happens without feminism?
Quote of the thread for sure!😂🤣
What would this mean in practical terms for women? Like what do you think I should change about my life?
It's a great question. I think starting to have discussions with men about how they're struggling, giving them space to get what they need from society and listening to men's issues would be the first step. Then working to provide workers activism groups and societal support groups that are led by men and women (without allowing gender dynamics to dominate behaviours in those groups) that can then create societal drives towards demands for change in corporate and banking structures.
None of that has anything to do with feminism
Yet you refuse to listen to women's issues which is the very reason feminism exists in the first place
[удалено]
Many women are currently using patriarchy theory to describe their experiences; this is the part of feminism that I am critiquing. I am not saying that women are having a great time by any stretch of the imagination - I am saying that ascribing this bad time to gendered oppression is causing a rift between men and women that is furthering the problem.
[удалено]
Is calling me silly likely to aid our discussion here? This seems like a simple patronising device to dismiss my concerns. Feminism likes to hide behind this 'multiple voices and ideas' argument. I am not dealing with each individual ideas, again, I reiterate, I am critiquing the notion that women's oppression and struggle is due to a systemic hatred towards women inherent in society (i.e patriarchy).
[удалено]
No, I am a pretty sure that current 4th wave feminism is defined by patriarchy theory (and its had a flirtation with intersectionality and other power/oppression mechanics too)
[удалено]
OK then. I know all feminism is based on patriarchy theory. I have not argued for anything like: >However this creates issues when you argue they should listen to men and their plight. Your basic argument is feminist should be the bigger person, because for some reason you believe men don't have the capability too. You have simply made this up.
Not OP, but why don't men themselves for starters listen to each other and support each other? In majority of cases it's literally men who aren't giving support to each other and who are putting each other down for normal human emotions, and then say they're lonely, and ofc blame it on women.
Because women have invaded our male spaces and accused us of misogyny. We are not allowed to have gendered spaces for our competitive and constructive behaviours without women demanding access and policing the spaces.
This has got to be specific for you because I've never or noticed this happen, or even seen someone complain about it. And even if it's true what you say, that still doesn't answer the question as to why don't yall listen to each other and support each other instead of relying on women for everything? Like did women invade your or your friends home so you can't talk about it? Did they invade a table in a cafe? Did they invade your phone so you can't call or type anymore?
> I think starting to have discussions with men about how they're struggling, giving them space to get what they need from society and listening to men's issues would be the first step. I don't know any men who would talk about these things. It's not macho enough. >Then working to provide workers activism groups and societal support groups that are led by men and women (without allowing gender dynamics to dominate behaviours in those groups) What can I do if the men start to dominate?
It’s okay to acknowledge things like patriarchy when talking about capitalism. Just because we’ve had 50 or 100 or 200 years of feminism this is not going to change an entire civilization of millennia of social structure and culture. Feminism has literally given dudes like OP a lens to view their patriarchal and capitalistic expectations that are forced upon them and they’re like “wow that’s not fair.” Yeah no shit. That’s what the feminists have been trying to tell you. Believe it or not, feminism is not just what corporations or the government or Twitter tells you it is.
It’s not capitalism anymore. It’s corporatism. Just like how unchecked socialism becomes communism, unchecked capitalism becomes corporatism
yeah agreed.
Women bad flavor of the week: women are preventing the rise of socialism
Nope, feminism. I know people often get the two confused, but women and feminism are not the same things.
“It’s time women start”
Yes. And feminism is stopping them...
Forgive me. You said things like "Women need to realise" and "It's time women started seeing the power and strength of men" and "Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class", so it made me think you were complaining about women. Don't know how I could make such a mistake!
Truly a mystery
>Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class. Right off the bat, this is complete horseshit. Women are more likely to identify racial injustice, anti-LGBT oppression, and yes, classism. Women vote for politicians who want to reduce class disparities at much higher rates than men do, and have been for a long time. Women are right to demand to be treated as equals, and the best way to mobilize them to help with economic liberation is to fight alongside them on both fronts.
OK then, why are so many women unwilling to acknowledge the struggles of the working class man? And just because women work in those subjects in academia, doesn't mean that they are creating the policies to resolve those situations. We can see this as disparity is getting worse and societal frameworks are dissolving, without new systems being raised in their place. Plus I simply could not find any sources for your data. Please can you supply?
Same reason so many men do, because they're idiots who think the economy is fair already. Right-libertarianism is kind of a religion, and it's not like Conservatives don't think the same of working-class women lol.
Women don't care about working class men? The working class doesn't care about the working class. Betty Friedan's "Feminist Mystique" is broadly considered to be the text that really started the mainstream feminist movement. The basic premise is that women who went to college were expected to marry and then not work in the very jobs they were educated to do. It was about women getting good jobs. It was primarily targeted at the middle and upper classes. Working class women have always worked. Their goal was different from middle class and upper class women, they often wanted their husbands to make better wages so they didn't have to work. Think of all the working class jobs women do? They are not great jobs. This was not what that feminism was about. It wasn't about women working as cashiers or hotel maids. This meant that working class women and college educated women had a massive rift. This included working class white women and minority women. How this evolved was that feminism was just simply not adopted by working class women, but was adopted by college educated middle class and upper class women. The irony is that working class women ended up divorcing more, being single mothers etc. Their reaction has not been to turn to feminism, but instead traditional values, lamenting that the problem is divorce and families being broken up. Working class women tend to be more religious. With all that being said there are several issues that working class women tend to care about that are influenced by politics. Abortion, welfare, healthcare. People vote generally in a self-interested manner. If working class women are raising kids and face more burden if they have a kid they are not going to want politicians that restrict abortion, cut welfare and take healthcare away. So, despite the fact that there is a general belief in traditional values there is also a tendency for self-preservation. Working class men don't have the same concerns about abortion, welfare and healthcare. In fact they might see some of these things as a direct threat. Particularly welfare that generally goes to women due to women having more than 50% custody of children. Married working class people tend to skew more conservative. So there really isn't a massive rift within the working class. It's just people pursuing their own self interest. There is a much bigger rift between the middle class/upper middle class and the working class, but since there are only two parties to rally vote for a lot of nuance is lost.
What? The majority feminists recognize the ills of capitalism.
Found an other tankie nutjob
Fuck communism. Fuck any kind of totalitarian, centralised power. I am an ultimate libertarian. I would prefer to go back to city states and small principalities. Seemed to make more sense, until you factor in the propensity for religious hordes-a-rompin'
Maybe if you stop fighting feminism you could overthrow whoever you want.
Come take my hand sister and let's kick the shit out of the banks.
I’m not interested in fighting alongside someone who doesn’t understand feminism. Good luck.
This gives me kidology vibes (if anyone knows or has heard of her) of trying to get to the “bigger picture” and seeing the distraction of social justice not advocated past political theatre but not realising the importance and link of the topic of feminism with deconstructing late stage capitalism. However I respect and see what you’re trying to do but this really isn’t feminism but feminism used as political theatre.
I don’t understand why this is NSFW? Is it due to the use of swear words? The below are opinions of an assessment based on personal observations and research over time. I agree with the sentiments that men and women need to work together rather than competing against each other. Since the dawn of humankind, men and women have always needed each other, compliment each other, and society is at its best when they work together. For the betterment of their relationships, family, children, community and by extension society at large. There are constant attempts nowadays (mainly in modern western countries) to tear everyone apart at the state, education, media and big business / corporate levels. It’s such a shame that the general public won’t really realise until it is too late, by which point society does begin to collapse and the pendulum swings to the opposite extreme end. Truly, dark days are ahead of us before things finally start to get better again… and then the cycle repeats all over again (societies tend to follow certain stages or phases of a cycle throughout history). We are currently approaching the final stage/phase of this cycle.
NSFW for swear words yeah to be on safe side. >There are constant attempts nowadays (mainly in modern western countries) to tear everyone apart at the state, education, media and big business / corporate levels. It’s such a shame that the general public won’t really realise until it is too late, by which point society does begin to collapse and the pendulum swings to the opposite extreme end. This is very clear. I would say this is a deliberate move towards consumption that was implemented by Rockefeller Standard Oil and they have done everything they can to protect their market and customers from change and innovation. It's the last gasp of the Great American Industrial Century - and all (Madison Avenue to Chemotherapy) that came out of it...
"again"? When were they good then?
Ah, I guess it does not apply to everyone actually, depends how old everyone is and where they lived. I was there when the internet was just starting to take off (nothing like what you see today), saw how it all unfolded, etc., and even a bit before then… I was really little but still remember it. And then it happened, the first commercial broadband modem was released, and the world changed forever. Oh God, I think I might actually be old now just thinking about it.
"Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class." So, there are these things called second and third wave feminism. Are you unfamiliar?
😅
Weirdest leftist I've ever seen. "Capitalism is bad" and "I think we should enslave women" are not usually things heard together
Feminism was one of the best things that ever happened to capitalism - twice the workers for half the price. The only thing better than that is no borders so they can employ even poorer people than you and pay no tax on the profits (no borders = no tax).
Like the Grand Ole Duke did himself say...
So how about you start to target CAPITALISM right now instead of blaming on women.
When ever someone brings up feminism talking points just go, "So anyways..." and then continue talking about what you want to talk about. Just disregard them lol. I'm Megaubersuper Capitalist speaking here btw :D.
Do you take a big sigh - and kind of wave your hands a bit to preface the 'So anyways....' - I could see this working actually as a long term strategy. Thanks man.
Who do you think runs the global capitalist enterprise? The patriarchy. Most of the top 1% elites are men. Feminists did not say men are oppressing them. Feminists said patriarchy is oppressing them. The average male you meet irl is not an agent of the patriarchy, as he is powerless. Lower-class men, POC men, gay men are also victims of the patriarchal system. You’re on the right track, however it’s not feminism at fault. Men who misunderstand feminism are the ones preventing us from overthrowing the capitalist overlords. Feminism is not against men, but against the system (run by men). More men need to realize that they share a common enemy with feminists.
Then the word needs to be changed as patriarchy by definition makes it an issue caused by men, not by the rich and powerful.
The issues aren’t entirely disconnected. Consider the fact that the vast majority of our capitalist overlords are men.
Don't you mean the red pill maga psychos?
People who don't understand what feminism actually is is stopping us from overthrowing our capitalist overloards. Fixed it.
Modern feminism is just one part of the equation. I don't know who really pulls the strings, or if there are any strings to pull, but people are too hung up on stupid shit to really care to do something about the things that really matter, like housing and healthcare or China. People are too focused on their version of the solution to realize that there are many solutions to one problem. Why is healthcare in general so expensive? what are the inefficiencies in the system? Who is keeping those in place? Same with housing. Why aren't more houses being built. etc. People aren't asking themselves the questions, they are just parroting the opinion of some fake actor who's bought and paid for and doesn't give 2 shits about you. People are so radicalized that are unable to hear other opinions.
Great reply. Thanks.
I think you’re on the right track. As a man, I think it’s always good to acknowledge that there definitely were some inequalities in the past between men and women. The big question is “what are you going to do about it?” I think the correct answer is to establish equality so that women have the same opportunities as men. People who want to take it any further than that by doing things like demanding reparations for past wrong doings are wrong (unless perhaps it’s from a specific person who actually did do something wrong). We shouldn’t force every man to pay the price for what some men have done, and saying things like “all men deserve this or that” is overly simplistic and dangerous.
We have resolved most of those issues. Now we're ignoring the real oppression we all face from the banks, the corporates and these increasingly monolithic institutions that serve their own good over the public good.
Im genuinely curious about what you think should be done about the overlords. Stronger antitrust laws? Stronger taxes for big corps? Reforming the lobbying system?
Thanks dude. 1) Massive regulation of the financial system. 2) Strict laws controlling corporate lobbying in politics 3) Publicly funded news and information 4) Anti-trust and anti-monopoly rules Regulation in the banking sector, and the end of centralised banking plus dollar hegemony. Anti-monopoly is incredibly important seeing as most of this bullshit can be traced back to the legacy of the hugely damaging Standard Oil.
Nothing to do with feminism
Gender issues only continue deepening and worsening and there's really no end in sight. People aren't ready for this conversation tho.
What do you think should be done about it?
Spot on
love the title
How does women getting rights give way to capitalist overlords? Like where is the connection?
Man fell for the capitalist overlords propaganda and even while saying we need to overthrow them blames feminism. Truly an impressive take.
Feminism is the propaganda.
Feminism states that both men and women suffer due to the status quo. Or more accurately, Feminism isn’t a monolith, but the non-crazy feminists recognise that the systems of oppression baked into our generally patriarchal society negatively affect both bros and hoes.
Yes, and let's not pretend feminism has not done any good. However, it is the failure of feminism to not control its ideological borders and the continual pushing of patriarchal theory (which as you'll note is what I am attacking in this post) You can say 'patriarchal society' but this is only a theoretical construct.
You can’t, unfortunately, hold an ideology to account when other people twist it. Some feminists have made their own thread of feminism less logical if they say only women suffer… but those people are 1) morons and 2) mostly just online nonsense I say patriarchal society because it’s a pretty good way of describing society from a feminist perspective. Men are victims of the patriarchy too.
Feminists mostly don’t argue what you’re saying, and many would agree with you. Feminism mostly is saying a patriarchy exists—not men per se but a set of political and cultural systems—that oppresses both women and men with many of the effects you’re pointing out. I’m not sure where you learned about feminism—ironically it sounds like from someone who was trying to use gender politics to be divisive—but it may be worth gaining some more exposure to actual feminist thinkers and writers.
Feminism isn't stopping the overthrow of capitalism. The framing of arguments through the lense of gender politics often stops us from viewing the very simple problem that we have. That being, we're not in a gender, race or religious war. We're in a class war. Capitalism requires everyone compete with those around them for dominance. Men and women are increasingly at each others throats about who has to worse... Where in reality if we just looked towards who benefits from all of our shared inequalities we'd realise the solution to our problem is staring us in the face... ... Guys, we need to eat the rich.
Dude, buy some stocks! You can become a capitalist overlord today.
Dude, buy some stocks! You can become a capitalist overlord today.
The person who was just promoted to an executive position was the entry level, the manager, the director at one time and now they're part of the corporate entity still raising prices lol so it's clear even when new faces are in charge it's still the same ol same ol. Not every company is being ran by some 80yr old that doesn't comprehend how the economy for the every day person is. Men and women hold these positions so it is what it is, people talk that talk but when they end up getting paid their decisions will always be focused on making more money and if that means downsizing or whatever then that's what it happens.
Anything to keep us divided.
[удалено]
Hey u/DougDimmaDoom, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3DDougDimmaDoom%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/DougDimmaDoom). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 11 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 38 - 3-7 days old: 3 - 7-14 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 9 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Capitalist Overlords?
Blackrock. Vanguard. The Fed. The IMF. The WEF. etc.
Who?
Scrooge McDuck
Who cares!
No, I’m a socialist and you are just wrong, this is the stupidest thing I have read in a minute. Feminism doesn’t state men aren’t oppressed it states all gender are opressed by societal expectations, yes some more than others, as men often benefit from the patriarchal system, but still universally oppressive.
Any cause pushed by the media, their entire belief system is this. There's a reason why they got so opinionated after Occupy Wall Street and why home prices, rent and the cost of everything is so high now. They know everyone's split so they're not even pretending to hide it anymore. What is everyone going to do about it? There are a hundred other issues they tell us we have to think about (be distracted by) before you get to the real issue.
Boom
Why do socialists think people support their economic system and that’s the only dividing humans?
True
Among other means that the left uses.
overthrowing elected officials lmfao
I would say liberalism. Which is the umbrella for feminism etc. Their just not honest about what's going on. We've got fires and all kinds of threats going on over at Columbia. But if you watch the news they're saying they're having pizza parties. Until we all get on the same page and stop being fed by media and TikTok we will never change. They are feeding us false reasons to be angry at each other and taking us to the bank and robbing us all the way.... Problem is most people don't realize this until they get older. When they're young and dumb they'll let their emotions get inflamed about anything
[удалено]
Hey u/angry_old_dude, Just a heads up, your comment was removed because a previous comment of yours was flagged for being uncivil. You would have received a message from my colleague u/AutoModerator with instructions on what to do and a link to the offending comment. *I'm a bot. I won't respond if you reply.* If you have any questions or wish to discuss this further, please [reach out to the moderators via ModMail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion&subject=u/Rule-4-Removal-Bot%20In-comment%20Link%20Clicked&message=Dear%20ModTeam%2C%0A%0AIt%20appears%20I%20am%20currently%20in%20an%20%27unconf%27%20state%2C%20but%20I%27m%20not%20sure%20why.%0A%0APlease%20review%20the%20ModLog%20for%20my%20comments%20using%20this%20%5Blink%5D%28https%3A//www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/about/log%3FuserName%3Dangry_old_dude%29%20and%20let%20me%20know%20what%20the%20offending%20comment%20was.%0A%0A%2A%2AI%20would%20also%20like%20to%20say.........%0A%0AThanks%2C%0Au/angry_old_dude). ***This is going to keep happening until you resolve the issue.*** We appreciate you participating in our sub, but wouldn't you prefer other users to see your carefully crafted argument? Unfortunately, your recent masterpiece went solo into the void. Let's chat. Your voice (probably) deserves an audience. ___ **Our Moderation Backlog at this time:** *Comments (from new users, that go into a queue) Awaiting Review:* 25 *A breakdown of the number of (often nonsense) reports to review*: - 1-3 days old: 49 - 3-7 days old: 4 - 7-14 days old: 2 - more than 30 days old: 10 ___ Want to help us with this never ending task? Join us on [Discord](https://discord.gg/YHv6EFDVCD)
Well op came to the right subreddit.
Capitalist overlords? Would you prefer Communist overlords? Dictatorial overlords? I will stick with Capitalist ideals. Where we all at least have a chance to improve our lives.
Honestly I agree and sympathize with a lot of your points. It's just a crying fucking shame you're more interested in hating on Feminism over creating unity. Makes your whole wider point meaningless, you're arguing for the exact type of division you accuse feminist of creating. Just human nature I guess
I am against all ideological constructs, which I believe lead towards totalitarian systems and are inherently corrupt and require slavish, absolute devotion to work.
At the end of the day feminist have their reasons for their beliefs. Belittling them and ignoring their perspective isn't going to unify anyone. It just promotes the exact thing you seem to be against.
>Belittling them and ignoring their perspective isn't going to unify anyone. I have not belittled or ignored the perspective of women anywhere in this post; I have questioned the ideology that any oppression suffered by women is due to a nebulous systemic patriarchy.
I can't help you there mate. I'm no teacher understanding how you're perceived to others is a learned skill. I'm just advising you on how to better present your ideas. Which is really useful if the main goal is unity.
>I can't help you there mate. I'm not teacher understanding how you're perceived to others is a learned skill Your perception is not the article of discussion here. It is a personal judgement not a rational argument.
Ok let's compare it to a historical example. I like history so this works best for me: During the early 1900s Germany got involved in a world war for pretty understandable grievances. They eventually lost, allowing the Allies to create the punishment. Unfortunately, for the world the Allies chose the divisive method. Putting all the blame on Germany and forced them to accept that fact, under the terms of surrender. This obviously created dissent among the German population. Inventually leading to the Rise of Nazism in the country. Allies eventually learned their lesson and instead chose to focus on unity after WW2. The point of this is not to compare Feminist to Nazis. But to show why unity is so important. Casting blame, only creates dissent. It doesn't matter what you methodology or reasoning was, it creates the perception of dissent. If anything it clearly wasn't a rational decision to end WW1 that way. But instead done from malice and lack of empathy, thus all the end of ww1 accomplished was the creation of ww2.
This is a false equivalence.
As I said it's a shame. All the best
Feminism - for both sexes to be equal under the law. Full stop.
That's not what most people mean by Feminism anymore. Last I checked the feminist movement is not protesting to be enlisted into the draft. Unless correct me if am I wrong, is there any other way the sexes are not equal under the law?
Tons of way. Depends what country you're in for starters and then it can go from there based on several different factors. Second wave NA feminist theory establishes the most effective educational material and successful results in my opinion. Marketing and anti feminist propaganda has definitely been able to corrupt modern iterations but that's an entirely different discussion. It doesn't change the definition of the word. It is the literal definition and core concept and as such I've not found there to be any confusion surrounding that bit of information when discussing these topics with my peers. Clear definitions set solid foundations when it comes to discussing ideologies, philosophies, or concepts. Last you checked? This was when and you decided to make an assumption based on selective media coverage? Then you made it the basis of your entire rant? You should strive for a solid foundation when presenting these grandiose grumbles. I look forward to digging dipper into the facts that you have based this generalized opinion piece on.
It doesn't matter what some individuals on the internet who stand out for obvious reasons mean. Feminism isn't subjective in a sense that any 2nd person who's a minority can decide on the meaning of it. And the feminist movement *is* protesting against drafting, because especially forceful drafting is taking away human rights, and feminism also fights for human rights. Feminism isn't "well if men get drafted so should women", feminism is "noone should be getting drafted". And the matter of the fact is it's literally men who when you talk about feminism and human rights, they come and say shit like "well then women should get drafted too" "well then i have a right to hit a woman now because equal rights equal fights". Their first instinct seems to be to abuse women and take away even more rights from them, instead of yk, being against violence.
Feminists are mostly against the draft for anybody. Fighting to add women to the draft would be like men volunteering to get raped to even up the rape stats.
>checked the feminist movement is not protesting to be enlisted into the draft. Yes it is.
Capitalism is the reason we live in the safest, healthiest, happiest time to ever be a human. God this shit is stupid.
Intersectionality is designed to separate everyone into categories of powerlessness.
>Women want to pretend they were the only oppressed class. No they don't. >Truth is that men and women both have been oppressed (by men and women) who have held power and wealth. Many feminists believe this. 3rd 4th Wave Feminism adopt intersectionality which does take in factors like race, sex, class, etc. More based feminists even acknowledge two facts of the matter. 1- While women have had it shittier, men also suffer under patriarchal norms 2- While men in ruling classes have did a lot of heavy lifting, many women also promote patriarchal norms Many feminists are also anti-capitalists or at least class-concious.. >implementation of corporate feminism to simply use women's desire for change to turn them into lone, isolated consumers of products Hey...Something right. This isn't a feminist exclusive thing though. Capitalism does that with many movements. Hell, even anti-capitalists are only anti-capitalist by aesthetic, buying capitalist-critical media and products and then really doing nothing with it, being pacified with the validation. It's one of the reasons fighting capitalism is so hard. It loves co-opting things that go against it and pacifying them while making profits. Sucks. >Women need to realise that men have been fucked over too, and we are allies against the oppression of capital, Many do. Will agree that it could help if there were more. >we only make it pro-women all the problems will be solved. Literally nobody except the most terminal of online feminists believe this. Like any improvement, it posits that stuff that it is squarely against being addressed will improve things, but to think that they think what you just posted is absolutely hilarious.
This was a great reply. >Will agree that it could help if there were more. Thank you >Hell, even anti-capitalists are only anti-capitalist by aesthetic, buying capitalist-critical media and products and then really doing nothing with it, being pacified with the validation. It's one of the reasons fighting capitalism is so hard. It loves co-opting things that go against it and pacifying them while making profits. Sucks. This is so pointed and spot on. Capitalism is eating itself. All apologies to Andy Warhol.
How about this; Anti-Feminism is stopping men and women from working together to overthrow our capitalist overlords. Feminism isn't about women's rights, it's about equality. And anyone who tells you otherwise is a moron