Like ePoster would always point out, all movements are built on a foundation of principles and ideology, whether good or bad.
Feminism, a movement that advocates gender equality, and
Mgtow, (men going their own way), a gender based group whose aim is to deliever its members from the clutches of all manipulative women.
Both of the above associations, were founded for the betterment of their respective members lives.
So was religion! Which once preached love but with time, has become nothing more than a lucrative business for fraudulent people who feed off the gullibility of others.
In the case of the mgtows
What simply started out as a foreigner miseducating the victims of romantic relationships has now become a ridiculous redpill craze.
Rather than read ubunja's writeups, these group of individuals would rather spend all their time online arguing with others who do not believe in what they do, tagging the women as feminist and the men as simps. They denounce all relationships, and advise ...

...any male with romantic problems to read the miseducations whether the issue calls for it or not.
Every topic regarding a man making sacrifices for a woman is flooded by this individuals who have nothing but vile to comment. And if its about a male being too hard, he is praised as an alpha.
Empty vessles make the loudest noise!
While nairaland's mgtow counterparts abroad, practice the 'doctrines' of their group, they also help other guys too. Men in abusive relationships are reached out to. Awareness is spread in rather enlightening ways that one cannot help than to admire them.
The mgtow, like religion was brought to africa by the westerners, and like the latter, has being made into nothing by the loudness of our precious black race.
So while a white mgtow seeks to liberate his mates, our brothers brag about their enlightenment and wisdom...

ePoster:
Like ePoster would always point out, all movements are built on a foundation of principles and ideology, whether good or bad.
Feminism, a movement that advocates gender equality, and
Mgtow, (men going their own way), a gender based group whose aim is to deliever its members from the clutches of all manipulative women.
Both of the above associations, were founded for the betterment of their respective members lives.
So was religion! Which once preached love but with time, has become nothing more than a lucrative business for fraudulent people who feed off the gullibility of others.
In the case of the mgtows
What simply started out as a foreigner miseducating the victims of romantic relationships has now become a ridiculous redpill craze.
Rather than read ubunja's writeups, these group of individuals would rather spend all their time online arguing with others who do not believe in what they do, tagging the women as feminist and the men as simps. They denounce all relationships, and advise ...

leave feminist and mgtow alone (especially mgtow you despise more than feminism)

Arthur21:
leave feminist and mgtow alone (especially mgtow you despise more than feminism)

I despise both. I believe in gender equality and i admire alphamales. The mgtows and feminist here are like errant kids.

ePoster:
I despise both. I believe in gender equality and i admire alphamales. The mgtows and feminist here are like errant kids.

Feminism, a movement that advocates gender equality!

In the case of feminism.
once built to advocate gender equality, the feminist movement is now a means for jobless women to gain undue priviledges. These ladies who know nor believe anything about this association claim they do to massage their ego and drag shoulders with men regarding superiority...
These loud female who have absolutely nothing to offer, take to social media to display their myopicness...

Rather than fight for fight for the victims of gender roles, and all that, these clueless women would waste their time doing nothing else than bragging.
These same women would later denounce the feminist movement when the word responsibility is mentioned.

ePoster:
In the case of feminism.
once built to advocate gender equality, the feminist movement is now a means for jobless women to gain undue priviledges.

This is not true, and debases your entire argument.

Even if some do what you claim, it does not mean they define what feminism is.

budaatum:


Feminism, a movement that advocates gender equality!

I thought it is a movement to raise women right to be equal to men's right. Your definition is more like humanism /egalitarianism.
I have heard ladies say I believe in equal rights of both genders but am not a feminist. Feminism is tilted to pro-woman.
Your definition is a generic definition that may cover men right as well. But be specific,its to raise women right to be equal to men.

[quote author=budaatum post=85903423][/quote]I guess what the op is referring to is chauvinism. I am engaged to a feminist. She simply believe everyone should be treated equally and rightly whether with a penis or vagina. The op is not referring to such but the loudmouths, nags,victimhood wailers,"men are scum" conveyors.

Arthur21:
I thought it is a movement to raise women right to be equal to men's right. Your definition is more like humanism /egalitarianism.
I have heard ladies say I believe in equal rights of both genders but am not a feminist. Feminism is tilted to pro-woman.
Your definition is a generic definition that may cover men right as well. But be specific,its to raise women right to be equal to men.

Feminism refers to those who actively fight for equal rights. Even men can fight for equal rights for women.

budaatum:

Feminism refers to those who actively fight for equal rights. Even men can fight for equal rights for women.

I understand your point but be specific. Its too raise women right to be equal to men.
When you say just a fight for equal rights of genders you imply the movement fights for both men and women rights. The name feminism is from "female", its to liberate females. It doesn't include men.
Men have their own(I guess men's right movement or so).

Arthur21:

I understand your point but be specific. Its too raise women right to be equal to men.
When you say just a fight for equal rights of genders you imply the movement fights for both men and women rights. The name feminism is from "female", its to liberate females. It doesn't include men.
Men have their own(I guess men's right movement or so).

Yep

Arthur21:

I understand your point but be specific. Its too raise women right to be equal to men.
When you say just a fight for equal rights of genders you imply the movement fights for both men and women rights. The name feminism is from "female", its to liberate females. It doesn't include men.
Men have their own(I guess men's right movement or so).

"The name feminism is from "female", its to liberate females." Men can fight to liberate women too, just as white people join the fight for the eradication of black enslavery. They don't care to liberate men who are oppressing them because that would be like a chained slave fighting for his and his master's freedom.

budaatum:

"The name feminism is from "female", its to liberate females." Men can fight to liberate women too, just as white people join the fight for the eradication of black enslavery. They don't care to liberate men who are oppressing them because that would be like a chained slave fighting for his and his master's freedom.

Lol....can you list ways men oppress women?so how about men who aren't oppressing them.like a normal good guy?are they excluded?

Anyway am glad you accepted the real definition which is to liberate women from their alleged oppressors and not fight for gender equality. People use those two definitions interchangeably. Feminism divides humans into two,tags men oppressors,females victims and try as much as possible to liberate females from them.
While people who fight for gender equality are those who may not necessary hold up that victimhood mentally but feel men and women should be treated equally and will go as far fighting against any body that threatens a human based on his /her gender,be it a male or female

Arthur21:

Lol....can you list ways men oppress women?so how about men who aren't oppressing them like a normal good guy?are they excluded?

You can do a search for an answer to your question so forgive me for not doing it for you, but one major way women are oppressed is by depriving them of education and making them dependent, or believing they do not deserve the same rights as men.

And yes, some men are decent honourable "normal good guy" that even feminists would love to have as fathers, brothers or husbands. Just as not all feminists are as op described so too are not all men pigs.

Arthur21:

Anyway am glad you accepted the real definition which is to liberate women from their alleged oppressors and not fight for gender equality. People use those two definitions interchangeably. Feminism divides humans into two,tags men oppressors,females victims and try as much as possible to liberate females from them.
While people who fight for gender equality are those who may not necessary hold up that victimhood mentally but feel men and women should be treated equally and will go as far fighting against any body that threatens a human based on his /her gender,be it a male or female

Hmm! A feminist is not necessarily a victim; men can be feminists too, so the fight could be for equality. The point is each fights for the bit of it that concerns them.

A feminist does not necessarily want to oppress men, though I'm sure there are some females who might want to.

budaatum:

Hmm! A feminist is not necessarily a victim; men can be feminists too, so the fight could be for equality. The point is each fights for the bit of it that concerns them.

A feminist does not necessarily want to oppress men, though I'm sure there are some females who might want to.

no one talked about a feminist oppressing men. Men can be oppressed by non feminist,feminist or their fellow men.

I didn't say a feminist is a victim,I said a feminist is someone who holds the victimhood ideology of males the oppressors and them the victims,it can be a males,females,anybody...

Exactly I love the way you used the word ,"could"..

I was just tired of feminist gas lighting people to believe it was created to fight for equality of genders. It seems they fear being condemned for their choice to fight just for women who they perceive the victim. By the way men's right movement fight for men alone. They should be proud of what they stand for,which is a pro-woman course.


Mary: I believe in equality of both genders.I want men and women to be treated right whether they possess a penis or vagina.

Hannah: I believe women are oppressed and have been secluded. I want to fight for their liberation.

Hannah is a feminist, Mary is a humanist/egalitarian.
And guess what? I support both of them if the outcome will make the world better.

Arthur21:

Mary: I believe in equality of both genders.I want men and women to be treated right whether they possess a penis or vagina.

Hannah: I believe women are oppressed and have been secluded. I want to fight for their liberation.

Hannah is a feminist, Mary is a humanist/egalitarian.
And guess what? I support both of them if the outcome will make the world better.

I think the issue here is in thinking Hannah's fight is to bring men down (which seems to be op's position). It is a view of the threatened male, but not a justified one.

Both Mary and Hannah could claim to be feminists even if no one agrees they are. They could also claim to be humanist/egalitarian since they both are fighting against a lack of equality in their own way.

budaatum:

I think the issue here is in thinking Hannah's fight is to bring men down (which seems to be op's position). It is a view of the threatened male, but not a justified one.

Both Mary and Hannah could claim to be feminists even if no one agrees they are. They could also claim to be humanist/egalitarian since they both are fighting against a lack of equality in their own way.

Na, Hannah liberating women ain't bringing down men. Saving a victim from the oppressor ain't destroying the oppressor.
I don't view Hannah as threatening the males(if at all I did how is not justifiable if I have my facts that Hannah is doing so by her actions for example her becoming a misandrist?)


I think there is no code of conduct deciding for feminists what they should fight /not fight for as long as the goal is to create equality.

Was just trying to clarify something,with the basic definition of equality of both genders,we men may assume it should include us and may call them bias for always raising up issues of women alone. But I felt there should be some specification that is was created for women so questions like "I thought you said its for gender equality, why are just pro-woman and not pro-man?" will not arise.

budaatum:

You can do a search for an answer to your question so forgive me for not doing it for you, but one major way women are oppressed is by depriving them of education and making them dependent, or believing they do not deserve the same rights as men.

And yes, some men are decent honourable "normal good guy" that even feminists would love to have as fathers, brothers or husbands. Just as not all feminists are as op described so too are not all men pigs.

This problem was solved by the greatest feminists in their time. Lord bless their soul. Amen. Today we have more educated women than men. So how is this a problem?

Why when the past is directly linked you, you would say let the past be the past even tho it was not solved. But when crucial matters like this that has no way been linked to you, you keep digging it up to make baseless claims?

If at the bolded was still a problem, believe me you wouldn't have been with a phone now. Pls think forward and stop bringing up the past that has been solved to humiliate your fellow humans.

budaatum:

Feminism refers to those who actively fight for equal rights. Even men can fight for equal rights for women.

They are called simps. Those men are simps.

Arthur21:

Na, Hannah liberating women ain't bringing down men. Saving a victim from the oppressor ain't destroying the oppressor.

I think there is no code of conduct deciding for feminists what they should fight /not fight for as long as the goal is to create equality.

Was just trying to clarify something,with the basic definition of equality of both genders,we men may assume it should include us and may call them bias for always raising up issues of women alone. But I felt there should be some specification that is was created for women so questions like "I thought you said its for gender equality, why are just pro-woman and not pro-man?" will not arise.

There is no code of conduct deciding what feminists fight for though it is "a range of social movements, political movements, and ideologies that aim to define, establish, and achieve the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes", according to wiki. Each feminists approaches it from their own understanding and experience. And neither is feminism a battle against men only. There are many women who oppose equal rights for women and/or support the patriarchic state of things that feminists fight against.

But as I've said, I'd personally find it odd for a chained slave to be fighting for his and his master's liberation, so I don't expect a person fighting against oppression of women to concern herself with the oppression of men per se, though, implicitly, most do. The slave is after all tacitly fighting for equality of himself and his master, and not for his freedom and his master's enslavement.

An example might be Rosa Park's fight to not sit at the back of the bus. It doesn't mean she wanted white people to sit at the back of the bus, but for everyone to be able to sit anywhere regardless of colour or race.

Another would be the suffragettes fight for "Votes for women" did not mean, "take it away from the men" but give us equal rights to vote.

budaatum:

You can do a search for an answer to your question so forgive me for not doing it for you, but one major way women are oppressed is by depriving them of education and making them dependent, or believing they do not deserve the same rights as men.

And yes, some men are decent honourable "normal good guy" that even feminists would love to have as fathers, brothers or husbands. Just as not all feminists are as op described so too are not all men pigs.

I was aware of the ways guys oppress ladies I wanted to confirm from you that is why I personally asked you. Some blame men for their choices and not necessary oppression. A man withholding education from a lady is a beast. So your claim stands.

Many see having some individual choices as oppression. For instance,my wanting a financially dependable wife as a spouse doesn't necessary mean I oppress ladies. If in my wishlist of a wife I include I admire/love a housewife I have done no wrong if I propose to one and we both mutually agree to it.
I become a beast when a lady wants to go to school and I withold school fees,threaten or bully her for doing so...

You see the difference? Some times men are tagged wrongly .that was why I wanted to confirm your criteria for oppression

I think you accuse me without knowing anything whatsoever of my crimes. As far as I know, only ignorant people do not link the past to the present. The past is after all what has led to the present.

There are a lot of women who are deprived of an education, and I do not agree that it can be measured by just owning a phone. There's after all lots of uneducated men with phones, as you might clearly detect here!

Omar09:


This problem was solved by the greatest feminists in their time. Lord bless their soul. Amen. Today we have more educated women than men. So how is this a problem?

Why when the past is directly linked you, you would say let the past be the past even tho it was not solved. But when crucial matters like this that has no way been linked to you, you keep digging it up to make baseless claims?

If at the bolded was still a problem, believe me you wouldn't have been with a phone now. Pls think forward and stop bringing up the past that has been solved to humiliate your fellow humans.

budaatum:

There is no code of conduct deciding what feminists fight for though it is "a range of social movements, political movements, and ideologies that aim to define, establish, and achieve the political, economic, personal, and social equality of the sexes", according to wiki. Each feminists approaches it from their own understanding and experience. And neither is feminism a battle against men only. There are many women who oppose equal rights for women and/or support the patriarchic state of things that feminists fight against.

But as I've said, I'd personally find it odd for a chained slave to be fighting for his and his master's liberation, so I don't expect a person fighting against oppression of women to concern herself with the oppression of men per se, though, implicitly, most do. The slave is after all tacitly fighting for equality of himself and his master, and not for his freedom and his master's enslavement.

An example might be Rosa Park's fight to not sit at the back of the bus. It doesn't mean she wanted white people to sit at the back of the bus, but for everyone to be able to sit anywhere regardless of colour or race.

Another would be the suffragettes fight for "Votes for women" did not mean, "take it away from the men" but give us equal rights to vote.

I never said its a battle against men,it is misandry that is.

I don't actually agree with your second paragraph though but am glad you acknowledged its what you think of personally.
Come to think of it budaatum,if as a feminist you go to a community were kids are not taken to school but left to hawk will you advocate for only female kids be taken to school and the male kid be left because "male are oppressors" and its odd to fight for slave masters freedom?

Arthur21:
I was aware of the ways guys oppress ladies I wanted to confirm from you that is why I personally asked you. Some blame men for their choices and not necessary oppression. A man withholding education from a lady is a beast. So your claim stands.

Many see having some individual choices as oppression. For instance,my wanting a financially dependable wife as a spouse doesn't necessary mean I oppress ladies. If in my wishlist of a wife I include I admire/love a housewife I have done no wrong if I propose to one and we both mutually agree to it.
I become a beast when a lady wants to go to school and I withold school fees,threaten or bully her for doing so...

You see the difference? Some times men are tagged wrongly .that was why I wanted to confirm your criteria for oppression

Well, sorry, but poor men, not! Just read what some say when they hear the word Feminism and you might understand my lack of sympathy. And trust me, I'm being nice because you are too. The pigs will soon start grunting here and my gloves would come right off. But as I've said, there's a lot of women who fight against feminism so even pigs find compliant women.

Arthur21:

I never said its a battle against men,it is misandry that is.

I don't actually agree with your second paragraph though but am glad you acknowledged its what you think of personally.

Everything I write and say is my personal opinion, view, and what I think. I am solely responsible for them all.

budaatum:
I think you accuse me without knowing anything whatsoever of my crimes. As far as I know, only ignorant people do not link the past to the present. The past is after all what has led to the present.

There are a lot of women who are deprived of an education, and I do not agree that it can be measured by just owning a phone. There's after all lots of uneducated men with phones, as you might clearly detect here!

A past which already had a problem that was solved yet in the past and it's solutions is being enjoyed today and will continue to the future, it's problem shouldn't be brought up as today's problem with the aim of defaming another gender.

Yes there some part which has their women as uneducated but those parts are precipitate to the current situation of things. And to change that notion in such places, using the internet to do so will have very little effect on the issue. Go to such places in person and educate them on the need to educate women.

More women have been educated even more than men, so using "women are being deprived of education" to back you belief is very wrong as it is contrary to the current situation of things. Women deprived of education is of the old. Not now.

budaatum:

Well, sorry, but poor men, not! Just read what some say when they hear the word Feminism and you might understand my lack of sympathy. And trust me, I'm being nice because you are too. The pigs will soon start grunting here and my gloves would come right off. But as I've said, there's a lot of women who fight against feminism so even pigs find compliant women.

I think what people say as response to feminism is their choice based on their experience with feminist. I have met good and horrific ones.I am to marry a good one this year
I think the pig here is you. You may have your definition of a pig,I do have mine as well...


Women are against feminism?how? You mean not joining the movement? Or opposing feminist? It is one thing to be against some feminist because of dispositions put up by them and also to be anti feminism.
I love feminism but have problem with majority of feminist(especially current day ones).

budaatum:

Everything I write and say is my personal opinion, view, and what I think. I am solely responsible for them all.

apt!

Omar09:


A past which already had a problem that was solved yet in the past and it's solutions is being enjoyed today and will continue to the future, it's problem shouldn't be brought up as today's problem with the aim of defaming another gender.

Yes there some part which has their women as uneducated but those parts are precipitate to the current situation of things. And to change that notion in such places, using the internet to do so will have very little effect on the issue. Go to such places in person and educate them on the need to educate women.

More women have been educated even more than men, so using "women are being deprived of education" to back you belief is very wrong as it is contrary to the current situation of things. Women deprived of education is of the old. Not now.

he/she had to talk use men as example for having a phone as not proof of education
Like is only male dunderheads we have over here