Anonymous #1 3w

Yeah, and the people who praise eachother for screaming “I HATE MEN!!!!!” like cmon

25

Anonymous #2 3w

So many people at my school think that everything wrong with society is men’s fault therefore men are horrible people unless proven otherwise

22

Anonymous pirosnake 3w

Feminism isn’t a bad thing but recently it’s been used to justify some really bad things.

29

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

You got a username on yikyak, pipe down

8

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

and what exactly is your evidence for this? and how does feminism destory the family unit?? it quite literally gives women the choice to start a family if they desire like literally every woman today is benefiting from feminism

11

Anonymous #4 3w

Yeah that's not feminism.

2

Anonymous #7 3w

My thing if you're aware of the difference between radfems and women supremacy and feminism, then why denounce women who are feminist?

0

Anonymous OP 3w

No True Scotsman

3

Anonymous pirosnake 3w

feminism is not women supremacy... like oh my goodness feminism helps women AND men 😭 that's like saying people who support black lives matter are black supremacist.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Many young men don’t know the difference and it’s easy to be radicalized as a teen boy

22

Anonymous OP 3w

The earliest feminist literature and promoters from the late 1800s who sought to bring women out of the house and into the workforce so that the labor market would be flooded with new labor, thereby crashing the value of labor via stagnating wages/salaries amidst inflation.

13

Anonymous pirosnake 3w

I'm well aware of Earl Sliverman and it's a heartbreaking story. I however do believe it wasn't a single feminis that stopped his shelter but the Canadian government failed to give him the funding he needed. I think also it was a result of just the time period. There wasn't as much support back in the early 2000s/late 90s for male DV victims as there is now. I'm not saying it was okay, but I think things are a bit better now.

6

Anonymous OP 3w

Plus people only start families when they have the time to, so when women are forced into the workforce by virtue of the effective death of the single income household and social conditioning they often opt to focus on their career first and put off starting a family often until it is too late. Even when working women do start a family they are forced to offload the responsibility of child care during working hours, eroding the sacred bond between mother and child.

10

Anonymous OP 3w

You are correct, not all feminists are women supremacists and not all BLM supporters are black supremacists, but it's possible to be both and to use the tools of one movement to achieve the goals of another. I think you've missed that.

13

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

You are failing to mention a major reason why women went into the workforce was because the men were away at war and the economy was collapsing. They needed people to work. I also don't understand especially from a male POV why the death of the single income household is a problem? Wouldn't it be less pressure on you the man to not have to spend the majority of your time working to support your family and you and your wife could split the time spent working and create that bond with your kids?

1

Anonymous OP 3w

The attempts to get women into the workforce and the origins of feminism as a social movement existed long before the world wars, the war just provided the catalyst. I seriously disagree about the death of single income households being a good thing for either women or men, as it has significantly increased the required working hours to maintain a household by having both parents work and get home to work on the house rather than having foreign and domestic affairs handled separately by...

12

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

it's also never "too late" to start a family. i don't see like what you're saying on how feminism killed the family unit, when family unit is a vauge term that could really mean anything depending on the person and i also think it's a good thing that women or men are not forced to because a family unit before they are ready. Plus not everyone wants kids and that's okay. I can kinda see what you're saying about the profits but i don't see how the social aspect of women becoming more of a leader

1

Anonymous OP 3w

within a household is a bad thing.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

... husband and wife. This actually reduces the net amount of free time the parents have. Even if it was more stressful for men and men would have to work more in total, every (good) man i know would take on the extra burden if it meant it would make the lives of their family easier, but it is just simply no longer possible

2

Anonymous OP 3w

Its wasnt a single feminist but a several. They launched a harassment campaign against him an pressured elected officials in the canadian government to stop them from giving him funding. Part of the reason male DV victims weren’t taken as seriously was also feminists fault. The Duluth model for example.

12

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

okay well first of all taking on a burden of overworking yourself shouldn't make you a "good" man. and secondly, your reasoning isn't very inclusive to families that don't fit a typical husband and wife unit. what if they're two wives? or two husbands? or what if a couple doesn't want kids? or what if they do but the women wants to work and the father wants to stay home? I'm just saying I feel like feminism might've destroyed the traditional family unit which isn't a bad thing imo.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Green: Women can't have children forever, my mother has said she wanted more kids but waited too long. Yellow: When i say "killed the family unit", i am saying it has both vastly reduced the rate at which people start families and reduced the stability/quality of life for those in a family unit (meaning husband+wife+children).

6

Anonymous OP 3w

and i also think that even within a single income household it shouldn't be a sole responsibility of the parent who stays home to rasie the kids and take care of the domestic chores like a wife shouldn't be the only person cleaning up

3

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Orange: I agree, but I don't think they should be payed the same as men working to support their whole family on their single income alone. I'll concede women's ability to own property and other gains in ownership were a net positive. Red: Yes, but i would argue the reason the proportion of women wanting kids has tanked is from the undesirability of being a working mother vs stay at home and social conditioning to put career first.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

Purple: It's not about leadership, it's about the additional responsibility of having to be a working mother placing extra undue stress on both husband and wife. Ideally men lead in foreign affairs while women are the heads of all domestic affairs.

1

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

not naturally no but you can always adpot, foster, and surrogacy and in extreme cases freezing ur eggs! yeah but a family doesn't just mean a husband wife and kids lol

5

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

but that's not ideal for everyone, and i don't think social conditioning is why women aren't wanting kids, like plenty of women have kids there is a whole trend called Trad Wife of like 22 year old women married with 5+ kids. I don't think that is dying, i think a lot of women now are just passionate abt their careers.

1

Anonymous OP 3w

Relationships are not purely transactional so it is true that in the event that either husband or wife are stressed/sick/or in need of general rest, their partner will take off some of the weight of responsibility by helping with the other's tasks. The default allocation of responsibility is different in different relationships but generally the man working make money and the woman working to upkeep the household is the tried and true loose template to base things on.

0

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

I think just bc something is "tried and true" doesn't mean it's not problematic or something we as modern day people should still adhere too. Both grown men and women should be responsible for doing his own laundry, packing his lunch, buying groceries or cooking dinner. That's part of why the single income household i think is problematic bc it does create transactional relationships and often times the man doesn't know how to take care of himself bc his wife does everything.

3

Anonymous stanczyk 3w

You didn’t pipe down like I said peasant

4

Anonymous OP 3w

The death of the single income household doesn’t mean that men get to work less; it just means that instead of one person working full time being able to afford a house; now they need TWO people working full time to afford the same thing.

1

Anonymous #7 3w

I love you

7

Anonymous inphochewated 3w

r response

2

Anonymous inphochewated 3w

Gang upvote this nigga NOW

5

Anonymous #1 3w

and i hate the "if you're a good man it wouldn't bother you" comments when someone gets bothered by "all men are bad" or something like that. even if youre a good person, words are powerful and they can get to you, making those words extremely divisive. and for the young impressionable boys that have no discernment but are neutral in terms of bad/good, they will feel hurt by those words and turn to the opposite extreme, and also possibly be conditioned to believe that they aren't desirable

7

Anonymous #4 3w

i don't think the alternative tho should be to go back to the way things were in the 1940/50s though bc the modern family is different now and it's okay for women to have career aspirations

1

Anonymous OP 3w

How about this; both parents work 16-24 hours a new week, nobody gets worked to the bone; and they still get paid enough to have what they want (a house, two cars, a small boat, etc)

0

Anonymous #4 3w

yeah except there is literally no job on earth where you would be able to work 16-24 hours a week, even if you were making enough. some jobs take time like teaching, school definitely shouldn't be 3-6 hours a day. also construction would take forever if they only worked 16-24 hours a day as well. and those r just a few industries to name a few.

1

Anonymous #4 3w

i don't think the amount of hours needs to change, just the wages. i feel like a standard work week of 35-40 hours is good but i do agree that should be more than enough to live on and it's ridiculous that it isn't. i also think if everyone made a living wage then people would choose the careers they are truly passionate abt not just the ones that make the most money. i love my career field (entertainment) but it isn't the most lucrative. i however couldn't work a standard job without being

6

Anonymous OP 3w

miserable

1