This is exactly what I'm talking about with feminists trying to persuade people to join. "Do you believe in equality? Then you're a feminist!" No. I'm not. Because even if we pretend that 90% of feminists aren't tumblr feminazis, feminism only focuses on women. I want equality for all. How about equality for the men who've been fucked up by divorce? How about equality for the men who've been abused but then were told to "man up"? Feminism focuses on such petty issues but when an equality problem arises that actually gives women the advantage, they do their best to ignore it because they're a bunch of misandrists who want power over men, not equality. Stop using the definition that was valid maybe a century ago and realize that feminism has become something completely different from what it was back then. It's 2016, not 1916.

Oh damn, that actually is horrible. But again I wouldn't consider this a strictly gender thing, just a stupid judge and overall flaws in the jurisdiction system.
Exactly, which is why I'm for egalitarianism, because the current feminism movement is nothing but a farce.

Again, I share a similar experience. These things still happen and it's unfortunate, but I wouldn't say that a high percentage of men have a rapey mindset. Rape is literally demonized in our culture, and justly so as it is a horrible crime. I haven't heard of a case in which a judge would be okay with a man sleeping with a minor, but maybe I'm just not informed enough. As to what concerns more recent cases, such as the Brock case, it's horrible that they let him off with 6 months but men are not to blame, the corrupt people who accepted bribes from the guy's father are.
I used to see it like that as well, but when issues like the X-men poster or not girly enough emojis surface, it really gives the impression that 90% of feminists are feminazis. And I'm not talking about tumblrettes, although they are mostly the loudest, I have a friend irl who actually believes the wage gap is a thing, because feminists post made up/out of context statistics so much it convinces women to believe them.

I share those experiences, but meeting a few sexists or creeps doesn't mean all of them are like that. That's the problem of third wave feminism, one bad experience plus reading about others' bad experiences results in a group victim complex and the belief that all men are misogynist rapists or whatever. It only results in both sides suffering, with women being paranoid around men and men being misunderstood.
The thing is, 90% of feminism has moved onto tumblr and modern feminists are just feminazis, and while I agree with the original purpose of feminism, what it has become is quite shameful. That's why I made the analogy to communism, good original thought but it became a tool of oppression.

@starlass not argument, discussion. Also, please show me where the "insults" started.

I implied you didn't read it well enough which, judging by the fact that you reacted as if the word "western" wasn't even in it was an assumption accurate enough to be said aloud. Your assumption, however, was based on absolutely zero facts and thus was completely baseless. Besides, even if this assumption of yours was correct, it would change nothing. Or would you brush off all my arguments if you learnt I was indeed a basement dweller? Because ignoring arguments because they come from who you assume is a "white cis male" is downright discrimination. Everybody can have an opinion no matter who they are or where they come from. Equality, right? That's what feminism fights for, right?
Also, I know women who actively fight against the problems I listed. None of them identify as feminists because they know what feminism has become – a huge monster of a movement consisting of blaming problems on others and victim complexes.

^ thank you :]

I love how you automatically assume I'm a basement dweller. Feminist logic at its finest, "everyone who disagrees with me is a 30yo white cis male living in his mom's basement!" Also, name one feminist who actively tries to solve these problems. You've got Emma Watson who's also in the post above, but to be fair all she does is look pretty and make damage control speeches.

I know who Malala is, and indeed she is a great role model for women all around the world and today's feminists should follow her example. I specifically wrote "western feminist" so nobody could call me out on that but you'd have to read the text properly to notice that.

And what are the "vast issues" feminism seeks to remedy? So far I haven't met one western feminist who would actively engage in for example Middle Eastern oppression of women, female circumcision in some African countries, or anti-abortion laws. Every feminist on the internet ever seems to only mention personal problems and then somehow manage to blame them on men, or "the patriarchy".
Also, saying "being condescending is a behaviour pattern specific to men" is sexist.

I had hoped that someone would reply and we'd start a (more or less) meaningful discussion. By downvoting me instead of saying why you disagree you're only proving me right.

I'd also like to add that EVERYTHING looks like a good idea when you read its definition in the dictionary. That's because dictionaries are trying to present a neutral, unbiased definition of things. Example: "A political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government." Sounds okay, doesn't it? Hierarchy, yeah that's important in having a stable state, right? Authority, yeah I mean without authority and hierarchy there would be anarchy, right? Well, it's the definition of fascism.
This is why it's so easy for feminists to gain more supporters, because they hide behind the definition of feminism which looks okay, and most people are just so amazed by the "big words" that they don't do a background check. This is why it's so easy for feminism to excuse its bullshit spewing, because they hide behind the dictionary.

Czech Republic.
Most people here are atheists so like 90% of churches are completely useless, and another 9% still exist only because they're interesting architecturally and make for good tourist sights, thus boosting our tourism and consequently our economy. The remaining 1% is actually for believers.
(The percentage is made up but I've lived here my entire life and so far met only 4 believers so this estimation comes from experience)

Actually, if I remember correctly, he died and she couldn't heal him with her hair cause it was cut off, then she cried and her tears healed him.

Second point being, and I already started that thought above, that there's also a chance that the parents were on the right way to become doctors, inventors, celebrities, but were denied that because of faulty birth control and anti-abortion laws. The point is, there is absolutely no way of determining whether a person will become successful or not. Passing a law because "one of the children may have some potential" while making thousands of other children suffer, and ending potentially promising careers of their parents, just seems to me like sacrificing a lot for a slim chance of gain.

Chu has a point. Parents' lives matter too.
I'd also like to add, speaking of the chance that a child will rise from bad conditions and become successful, what if it were the parents who would become successful, but they won't because they have to settle down and take care of the child? I know we've moved past that but I just wanted to add two points. First one being that making thousands of children live in shitty conditions because "one of them may become successful" is kind of against my common sense. Okay, so we lose one millionaire, but also lose thousands of people who would likely grow up to be drug addicts, criminals, people living on welfare etc. because of the socioenvironmental conditions they grew up in (I honestly don't know if "socioenvironmental" is a word, just translating from my mother tongue, sorry if it's incorrect).

This is one of the situations where there's no "right" answer. Personally, I think that getting rid of a foetus that is not developed enough to feel anything is better than having a child and letting it live in bad conditions. A lot of people probably disagree with me because for them it's murder of a possible human being. The thing is, maybe I'm a pessimist or a downright sociopath, but to me death itself doesn't seem like such a big deal, unless it's someone I really care about, obviously. Better a painless death than a shitty life that has a 0.00000000000001% chance of turning good.

Don't know about book hoarder, either I'm not on here long enough or he just wasn't that active, but with mgoveia it was 50% that and 50% for commenting with MLP pictures/gifs, which if I remember correctly were sometimes even from brony rule 34.

Heh, yeah. Sometimes my sarcasm is so advanced that people think I'm stupid, but other times I can't understand when someone is being obviously sarcastic, so I' sorry for not getting it right away.