Men`s pill under wraps: more evidence that equality is the last thing women want

So if a feminist is someone who thinks "one gender is better than another" would a humanist suggest that humans are superior to any/everything else? Would an activist be someone who thinks activism is better than anything else? Would a guitarist be someone who thinks guitars are better than other instruments?

Or is it just that the suffix -ist, actually denotes being. A feminist is someone who is or values femininity... A humanist would be someone who values and demonstrates humanity... An activist would be someone who values and demonstrates activism... A guitarist would be someone who identifies as a person who values and demonstrates proper use of a guitar. Even racists...by definition, a racist is someone who values and demonstrates their race preferences and ideas and identifies as such a person.

Feminist values have always been to encourage value and expression of femininity and to discourage arbitrary limitations on what those tendencies and abilities could be. That there are always people in any culture or movement who take things to the far extreme and place limitations on something that is supposed to be liberating is obviously not isolated to just the feminist community.

The most extreme people make the best news stories of course, but the quiet, active, daily struggle of feminism is so that many are so accustomed and spoiled by the achievements that they don't even recognize is as feminism.

Feminism is teaching girls that they are responsible for their own reproductive health. It is teaching them to empower themselves with information. It is teaching them that no one has the right to define their sexuality for them. It is teaching them that they are more than sexual objects, more than potential wives, potential mothers, potential girlfriends, and that there worth is much more than how some men, or many men, or society views their looks, or the functions of their bodies. Not only that...feminism is also teaching girls and boys both that femininity and masculinity are natural and that everyone deserves respect and equality.

You may not realize how often girls and women are taught to value themselves based only on these principles listed above, but feminism is there to teach men, women, boys and girls that we should all be given the same respect and consideration.

 

I see the points you're making, but regardless, that's not what feminism as a whole is. Common feminism wants to jump strait from one kind of discrimination to another, and if a word of protest is uttered, something is said about thousands of years.

In fact, actual discrimination against women was a more recent development, as the traditional and necessary protection of women in the tribal sense, needed to continue existence, became less necessary. People had lived that way since the beginning of time, and so it grew into a whole 'nother thing. But there where actual reasons for the social and sexual hierarchies that existed, and women where far from powerless.

So now that we have the technological means to do so, I think it's fine to say that everyone is equal, if they are physically or mentally able to do what they want, a traditional gender role should not stop them. At the same time, I greatly resent what many feminists spew, which is basically and endless stream of generalized lies and hateful stereotypes about men, and a call for subservient men in some sort of atonement for the perceived (not so proverbial) sins of their fathers.

Yes, feminism had an excuse for being radical when it originally emerged on the scene, but no more. In many instances the tables have turned entirely. Men are equal or greater sufferers of domestic abuse of all types, but generally are expected to take it, or not believed. If a woman makes any accusation of abuse against a man, it's essentially treated as direct evidence, he loses his reputation, job, whatever.... and it's a common threat on it's own. In child custody cases or child support cases, women are often exclusively favored, men have little option to do anything but pay and accept whatever poor terms they are handed, and are seldom even considered for custody even when clearly a superior parent to the mother. If a man is sexually assaulted by a woman, he has basically no chance of any sort of case against her, but if a woman points at a man (ESPECIALLY a black man....) he's locked up and the key is thrown away, with little or no proof. If a man needs to leave a situation that he is tied into, he really has no option, the mother, no matter what her behavior or habits are like, will get custody of any kids and he'll foot the bill, generally with no accountability from her as to how that bill is actually spent -- there's no emotionally abused or trapped or battered men's shelters (that I know of), and there would probably be a huge feminist fit about it if there was an organization providing them. And the list goes on. And the wost kind of manipulative women know all of this.

And yeah, I generally don't like -ism's..... but humanism is the most workable. I DO value human life and happiness above most other things, the only things that I value more are the things necessary to sustain human life.

 

I don't know which video this is, I just recognise the face. But this woman generally has it all figured out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp8tToFv-bA&feature=related"]Feminism and the Disposable Male - YouTube

 

Yeah, I dont know

If a male pill became popular, i think there would be a difference between what most assume would happen and what would actually happen

Usedtobehoney is acting like all girls are sweet, well no, big jump in the last decade with crime rates amongst teen girls, if they knew a lot of guys were on this pill, they'd probably end up acting even more aggressive, more like guys. And who would they pick on? The more vulnerable guys

And the ones Cherea described, the baby crazy ones. What lengths would they go to if they knew a lot of guys were temporarily sterile. Would you then start to see guys getting drink spiked then sperm raped as it well

So basically, as usual it will be the twinks and the nice guys that end up coping it worse

 

What label would you use for women who want to have equal status with men? Also, a significant number of men believe in that cause. What would you call them?

No organization tells me what to think.

Don't ever give up. Doing the right thing is always hard.

* * *

As for me, I can't think of any reason why I would want for my guy to take a birth control pill instead of me. The Pill makes my periods shorter and lighter, and it gives me protection from pregnancy in the (somewhat unlikely) case of rape.

I think the male birth control pill (if it is proven safe and effective, long-term) is going to be popular only with couples in which the woman has nasty side effects from The Pill, or medical risk factors that prevent her from taking it. Some single guys may want it, but they should be wearing condoms anyway, for STD's.

 

My boyfriend said he wouldn't want to take the pill. For the sake of being a smart ass to some of the sillier comments made in this thread, does that make him one of those annoying feminists?? Leave it all up to the women, is what he said. Put women in control and let him take a backseat to my vagina, goddamnit!

In all seriousness, he has the same health concerns about the pill that I do. Neither he nor I believe either of us should be more/less responsible regarding birth control due to our gender. Its something we discuss and decide together. If we were both single and sexually active I assume we would both take personal responsibility for ourselves.

Besides the fact that a few retarded "feminists" are protesting the pill in....Budapest (??) for ridiculous reasons no one really understands, why exactly should a gender bias come into play in this debate at all?

 

hmmm if this really works Maury could loose his talk show!!!

There would be no more "You're not the father!!!"

What will we do!!??

 

Theres a big difference between actually hating women and just getting fed up with all the bullshit (pretty much everything that comes out of their mouths )


What you've said there is probably No 1. You've made it sound like its only a small militant part of the sisterhood that are going to use kids and getting pregnant to latch on to a guy, guilt trip him in to staying with her....and then sometimes the gold digging, have him pay for everything. Or just a means of getting child support from a few individuals or the government. You going to try pretend they dont exist?

This stuff is everywhere, all around us. The main reason most of us were brought into this world. One only has to go to the local mall in the middle of the day when most people are at work to see the hoards of double decker prams, groups of women gasbagging over a latte for four hours. Knowing full well later on that evening when the husband gets home, they will be all like "Oh, I'm so tired and stressed from all the housework, kids were a handful, give me some attention, give me a back rub, but I'm still too tired for sex, you'll have to try harder"

Just cos most males are dumb as shit, doesnt mean we all are. Ridiculous reasons no one really understands? Some of us understand just fine

Even a guy like Cherea, who you think is this sites biggest mysoginist, even with his whores, still spends more time than the average doormat in female company. With your average doormat, wife wont let him have any real contact with pretty much any other female, a few drinking buddies from work again if the hubby is alllowed. And Cherea would have a little more exposure to girls that dont really give a crap about the kids thing and would rather spend their time fucking, whilst getting paid for it. And how many of those whores he gets with do you think have some doormat at home that doesnt know what she really does for a living not allowed near any other female

Feminism is like Religion, everyone is just talking about their version of what it means. Pussy Riot are my heroes at the moment, yah stick it to Putin, stick it to the Orthodox church. I'll follow the story closely. But in real life, I'd be too scared to be left in a room alone with them. Not keen on getting cigarettes put out on my tooshy whilst getting raped as some kind of bizarre payback for the way men have treated women throughout history, which is accomplished by some girl butcher than most guys picking on a guy prettier than her.

Depends on the definition of 'hate'. You can 'hate' the females in certain ways and yet still somehow manage to get stuck with them more than average. You all can be pretty bitchy towards each other, yet still find it easier to get along with each other compared to some guys.

Ones like Cherea, ones that complain out loud arent the real haters. Sure he's an asshole cos no chic is going to be able to raid his bank account for more than one night, and he may be too preoccupied with blowing his baby juice over your boobies, say shitty things to tease you or amuse himself. But that still doesnt mean he ends up interacting more with guys than girls.

Doesnt mean he actually thinks males are superior. Why are there so many of them that are so fucking dumb??? How/why do so many of them allow themselves to get whipped so bad. Seriously.

In the end its the quiet ones you girls have to watch out for, the ones that never get any attention from any females. Even if it is mostly negative attention in either direction, its still attention. Both positive or negative is still better than zero. They are the real haters

 

finally watched that video. and all i have to say is, at least there is one female out there who has her brain cells in order.

 

I know of one more: Camille Paglia. Although, I`ve recently seen an interview with her in which she said she "worshipped nature", which makes me worry that she`s leaning toward your average female lunacy in her old age. She`s still one of my favorite people in the whole world.

Edit: I`d say sex-positive feminists tend to reject using sex as a bargaining chip, putting pussy on a pedestal, or guilt-tripping men about sex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-chbRF8z-c"]Politically Incorrect with Camille Paglia - YouTube

 

i like how Bill Maher trips over his words when he introduces her by saying 'if you have not been aware of the contribution she has made to the feminist debate you really haven't been paying attention'. like much anyone outside feminist camp has. i've never even heard of her.

it's 44 fucking minutes long! my attention span does not last that long unless there is a hot guy involved....lol. i did watch bits and pieces, and even though she certainly doesn't seem like your average illogical female (yes, i am gonna keep on associating that word with women), she does tend to certain extremes. she's the first female i see that doesn't overdramatize the rape thing though, i do give her that. and Maher and her have it dead on about females dressing like sluts and then getting mad at guys looking at them. that has always been funny to watch going down. what a bunch of hypocrites.

okay. i got to a part where she said exclusive homosexuality is unnatural. there goes her credibility.

 

I think she meant it as, biological. She`s lesbian/bisexual herself. I know it`s the PC thing nowadays, the "I was born this way." But, there are gays who think of it also as a choice.

 

This mornings paper said tests are going to start on humans now,to try and validate their findings regarding tests on mice that seemed to be successfull and reversible once taken for mens birth control. It's coming,and in the near future ,from what I read.

 

'biological' what? sexuality is all biological. you are right, she is bisexual, ergo she has no idea what the hell she is talking about. it's the same thing Maher complained about some guys telling him, oh you just haven't met the right guy yet. it is BS. Maher knows his sexuality. who is anyone else to say that he doesn't. just like exclusively homosexual guys know their sexuality.

in association to this, i find heterosexuality (more precisely, sexual attraction to women) unnatural. it, in fact, is unnatural to me. but i don't go around claiming to know better than all those guys out there who chase after girls and call their exclusive heterosexuality unnatural. this whole 'every person is bisexual to a degree' is huge bullshit, said by self-proclaimed modernists who think this makes them look fashionable. unless you experience exclusive homosexuality or heterosexuality in first person, you are no authority to make such claims.

gays who think of it as a choice? show me one.

 

I`ll respond once, since I have a feeling we won`t agree on this one. At the very least, I think we can agree on Paglia`s potential concerning gender.

By choice I don`t mean, and I don`t think she means, you sat in an easy chair and said, "Oh, I`m going to suck me some dick for life instead of eating pussy. Just for the heck of it."

No. However, the other extreme would be claiming that there is no environmental pressure or repression in sexual choice. If you need an example of people repressing their heterosexuality, head over to the Lesbian subforum right here on this site. There are tons of threads of girls who feel conflicted and pressured to suppress their desire toward men, and wondering what their lesbian peer group will think of them were they to give in.

Likewise, it is well-accepted within the gay community that there are heteros who suppress their homosexual urges. But, somehow, mentioning repression the other way around is politically incorrect.

I don`t think Paglia is claiming that you consciously like pussy, but just choose to do dick. Nor is she prescribing pussy onto you. I think she mentions upbringing in the video, as one of the factors influencing sexuality. She is simply saying, in my understanding, that neither homosexuality nor heterosexuality are biological default states, untouched by environmental factors and personal choice.

Socially, one would have to explain Rome and Greece a little better. If sexuality is purely genetic, how would one explain such a concentration of homosexual genes in one society, only to disappear precisely when Christianity, which viewed homosexuality as a sin, took over?

I understand that the born-this-way argument became the way the gay community responded to right-wing Christians who thought homosexuality a sin. But there is a minority of gays who seem to agree with Paglia, and I can definitely say environmental factors have influenced both my heterosexual period and now my bicurious period. I`ll probably be fucking the shit out of men as soon as I get my near-constant preoccupation with females situated and out of my system.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVwpF6vbywY&feature=plcp"]Nature Vs Nurture Question Finally Resolved - YouTube

You`re welcome to respond, but I think this is a subject for another thread or PM.

 

Awesome. I can envision a world in which the male pill and the HIV pill are widely available; and, in which, prostitution is legal.

A lot of princesses, cockteasers, and nags will be out of work.

 

well that's a little different than using the word 'choice'. repression is one thing, environment is another, and conscious damn choice is yet a whole something different from either. you can't just throw it in with them and say that's what was meant. if you think it's a choice, call it a choice; if you think it's repression/environment use those words. but don't go out talking about a horse calling it a camel.

and no, we won't agree on the environment thing. firstly it has already been proven that exposure to sex hormones at critical times before birth influences the development of the brain and it has also been proven to influence gender-typical/atypical behavioral traits. secondly, if the environment were responsible for sexuality there would be a much more even ratio of homosexual:heterosexual individuals, and it would be possible to actually change one's sexual orientation, that has been consistently proven incorrect.

your example of history doesn't hold, since during the period of Middle Ages homosexuality was simply more repressed and more negatively looked upon than it was in ancient Rome. also, we actually have no historical records documenting people's sexual behavior and attitudes during that time, so we can't really say anything for sure about that period. we do however have extant records on people's said sexual behavior during the Renaissance. when for example in Florence there existed such a thing as an Office of Night that penalized and tried to eradicate males' homosexual behavior. unsuccessfully. Savonarola came on scene and tried to actually have everyone who committed sodomy killed, that didn't work. his sermons were finally stormed by men who were actually rallying for their right to commit sodomy and Savonarola failed miserably. it is also, that in historical times people didn't really call themselves homo- or heterosexual. i don't even know if anybody identified with their orientation like we do now. so we can't really talk about gay people and straight people in history. we can only talk about sexual behavior and attitudes. and homosexual behavior didn't just vanish into thin air with the rise of christianity as you proposed, it simply went underground and was not talked about. it was pretended it didn't exist.

the born-this-way argument surfaced because in most homosexual men's experience that is the truth. i don't care if anybody thinks it's a sin. i don't feel the need to defend that i can't do anything about it. and really i wouldn't even have a problem with it being a choice if that were so. theoretically speaking, what would be wrong with a guy choosing to be with other men? nothing. and if that were the case, if i did have a choice, i would still choose to be homosexual. however, never in my life did i make that choice. and my sexual attraction to men manifested already as early as the age of 5 when i didn't have damn clue what the hell i was experiencing. and i'm sorry but i highly doubt by the age of 5 it was the environment that threw me to the very end of the homosexual spectrum on that scale.

just like at least a huge portion if not all of person's personality/character is inborn, so i hold -and it makes sense- is the case with sexuality as well. some also argue that personality is caused by the environment, but an increasing number of scientists are starting to disagree with that claim.

now this one here is contradictory to what you said earlier. which one is it then?

 

I don`t see the contradiction, but fair enough.

Agreed.

 

I haven't looked at this thread in a long time...I just want to say usedtobehoney is not acting like all girls are sweet...at all. To the contrary I am sick of people seeing things that way. Sick of seeing my male family members and friends screwed over because they assume that all women are sweet, innocent and honest...but the same thing happens with women...that women believe all men are protective, strong, smart and respectful. One thing I just realized though, the reason this may be an issue is because women would then have to trust that a man is telling the truth about taking the pill...just as men have to trust the same from women. No one wants to put their life in someone else's hands and it is just that many men are naive and think women are stupid and "sweet" and innocent that this has happened often and has finally begun to have a huge backlash. I would guess that these women have experienced domestic abuse and fear the idea of putting their reproductive health in the hands of these men who say they have taken the pill. Whereas when you are a woman although you may lie and say you have birth control, it is not going to create another human inside a man's body if you are lying. Financial and emotional issues may come about...but frankly that is hardly an issue compared to what is really necessary to raise children... and I am speaking from someone who has seen single men and single women raising money and hardly getting a contribution from the other party.

 

This doesn't mean that women don't want equality, it just means that a small group of extreme feminists in Budapest don't want quality.