Professional feminists' of Poland meet-up

Again you're skiriting the issue dragging someone's mother into it. Equal pay for equal performance? Of course! But if an employee works let's say 2,000 hours a year, but a female employee is not performign at peak level for 40 hours a year (due to the menstrual cycle alone, let alogn pregnancy), then should the employer suffer because of it?

Let's not be so emotional. Some people claim you can't seriosuly discuss anything with a woman, because they fly off the handle, but I am still trying.

dude, your hangover mornings have a greater impact on productivity. LOL
The reason I said to ask your mother is because you should try entering a real world instead of just looking for proof for your inane theories.


what you're trying is to promote the stereotypes, but reasonable people can see right through it. If you believe that every woman just has to lose the ability to put up with bu11sht once a month and that affects her productivity, when you have to find somebody that believes that men thinking about sex oh.. thousand times a day might have some bearing on theirs, and have your discussion there. This should not be very hard to do, seeing that you like to surround yourself with the intellectual giants that have no problem suspending critical and logical thinking when discussing feminism, race and religion.

So, you try so hard to pretend that you're having a "serious discussion", while no rationally adept person could ever justify your beliefs without going through hugely incompetent steps to do so.

I guess they're right after all.

Translation:f2 and feminist apologists cannot refute the videos or the stated facts and figures. If they could - they would.
As to "nobody cares" it would seem that more and more men and good women are finding out for themselves what a hate movement feminism has become. History will not be kind to feminism!


You have stated your position but you have failed to objectively defend it with specific argumentation. You have also failed to comment on the many issues presented here that favor females. Like many women, you are incapable of listening when men talk. Women don't care about men's concerns, they only care about their own..

As to issues involving work productivity, it is true that in general women take more sick days than men. This is true in the U.S. and in all western societies (don't know about 3rd world countries)

dailymail.co.uk/news/article-512312/Women-46-cent-sick-days-men.html


Before going to the following link, not mentioned or factored in the sex category is the fact that women subconsciously (as well as consciously) think about sex when they put on make-up, short skirts, certain blouses, etc. If counted, women think sexually more than men. psychologytoday.com/blog/you-it/201106/do-men-really-think-about-sex-more-women

Turns out I don't really need an ignore function, it's easy not reading any of your cr ap, Zimmy.

@ Zimmy, you seem to think that feminists hate men. Honestly, they don't. And secure men don't hate feminists. Me? I'd happily have f stop's babies if she asked me :-).

......instead they just summarize their lack of facts by calling something "crap" or "hateful". They must teach that tactic in women's studies, lol


Tick-tock.....tick-tock......tick...

You seem to be one of the more sensible women here. Don't skirt (pun-intended) the issues in that video or even the video with Dr. Helen Smith. Don't be jaded like f2 is (she's incapable of arguing her indefensible positions).

Her limitred vocabulary consists of words like; "hate", "hateful", "sexist", "misogynist" , "your mother", and "oppressors", I sense you are smarter than that.

Now then pep talk's over.
We've already settled it, there a good feminists as well as bad ones.
There have been some positives that genuine feminists fought to achieve but now the feminazis are simply taking the p*ss and attacking men the only way they can and that is through institutions.

Increasingly, the victims of these assaults are little boys. How horrible are those c*nts, attacking children to push their agenda. There are some women who seem to be defending and denying the negative aspects of feminism. Don't be one of those people.


What? That's rubbish as far as I can see.
Someone could turn around and argue men have "too much" testosterone and take that same angle with you.
If a person can do the job they can do the job and jobs should be performance based. If you have some data for your menstral cycle angle then please show me any corroborating data. I've worked alongside some fine people and of them the women never brought any more or less drama to the scene than the men. Now if you want to talk about the incompetent people I've seen on the job....eh, I'd rather not.

Be fair, don't be like them.

Just being around feminists as they really are proves it. The following link is a small sample of many more quotes by feminist leaders.
fatherhoodcoalition.org/cpf/newreadings/2001/feminist_hate_speech.htm
From the link: ""All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman." ......Catherine MacKinnon. This university professor also said, "You grow up with your father holding you down and covering your mouth so another man can make a horrible searing pain between your legs."

""I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig." .....Andrea Dworkin;

"The institution of sexual intercourse is anti-feminist". .....Ti-Grace Atkinson (national board member of the National Organization for Women)

There have been thousands of feminist speakers who have demonstrated their 'male-hate' by their very words. Often, they've done this at universities in front of audiences but also their behavior at various protests where they swear and curse out men. The list of male-hate in articles, books and audience presentations is almost endless. Most women know this but don't want to own up about it, as evidenced in these threads.


Sight unseen? lol


Englishman can't help it. He is a 'white knight' which is another way saying, 'a slave for women'.
\


In the sense that about 5% are good and 95% are bad you are correct. Note their leadership quoted above.


Bad analogy. Testosterone and estrogen could be compared. (feminists have tried to give testosterone a bad name). Women's menstrual cycles have no equivalency to anything males have. It's 'mother' nature's gift.(smirk)

Zimmy, there are seven billion people on this planet. More than half are female. So there are more than 3.5 billion women and girls, while not all of them would call themselves feminists, the vast majority would agree with mainstream feminist principles and campaigns. The three people you've quoted - who represent less than one in a billion of the world's females - are far from typical of mainstream feminism and most women, including most feminists, would not agree with them.

Somebody tell us, what is it about women that they are constantly jabbering or nagging and have this thing about shoes? Shoes are just footwear, something to protect feet from different rough or cold surfaces. They're nothign special. Nothing to stare at or admire in shop widnows. When they wear out, you take them to a shoe repairer. When they cannot be mended, you buy the next pair. Thats' all there's to it. It's not some ritual or big deal!

No idea. My partner doesn't. Neither did her predecessor. In fact I've never had a girlfriend who did that. Perhaps it's some effect you have on women that they only want to talk about shoes.

You really don't get women (or feminism) at all really, do you?

Amazing!


You are truly brainwashed.


Do you understand that if I quoted all the feminists who bash males I'd still be typing? Besides, if you took the time to look at the link I provided you'd see plenty more quotes by feminist leaders. Try to up your game.


Feminist leaders set the agenda - that's why they are leaders. They are spokeswomen.

LOL, as to shoes, not all women are like Imelda Marcus:
dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2207353/Imelda-Marcos-legendary-3-000-plus-shoe-collection-destroyed-termites-floods-neglect.html
....but many women do have some sort of shoe fetish. Count how many pairs you have and how many women in your life own. lol

I can understand how Zimmy think feminists hate men. Unless a woman is a doormat, she'll either hate or pity men like Zimmy.

Englishman, what on earth are we doing even contributing to a thread like this?
While I frequently share much of my other contributions on the internet, I would be too ashamed to admit that I devoted any time to this level of ignorance.

Why on Polishforums? For those that are concerned about the image of Poland, consider this thread as one of the most damaging of all, considering that most of your readers are women.

I don't agree I dont think Z wants a doormat woman at all, what he wants is a truck driver like Lisa from ice road truckers who will buy him a beer

@ f stop, I think you've hit the nail on the head. A certain kind of man resents feminists, belittles and insults them, and in return, they see him as a dinosaur and dislike him. He picks up on this and uses their behaviour to justify his mysogenistic opinions. The solution, I think, is not to rend to his insults but instead to continue to explain why improving equality for women is good for both women and men.

I reckon not, because I beleive we are ałł humans first and foremost. Nationality, gender, political preference, cigarette brand, car make, favourite sport, beloved delicacy,etc. are all secodnary or tertiary.

Women are people like everyone else and if they're up to it they can be lorry drivers, ditch diggers, orthopaedic surgeons, astronauts, IT specialists, CEOs, and yes -- even housewives. The rabid feminsits want to deny that option by downplaying or shortchanging it. There are women who would like nothing better than to run an ideal housegold, raise children and have a nice warm meal waiting for hubby when he gets home from work. If that provides self-fuilfilment, It's their choice! And no mannish femi-agitator can tell them otherwise!

You haven't contributed a single specific fact. I've given dozens which you are incapable of refuting.


I've given you proof; actual quotes from top-line feminist leadership. One of my links shows a typical feminist shouting, cursing and name-calling men. She must be your idol.


"Facts are stubborn things"............Ron Reagan


Well, you are certainly closer to the truth. The women I date are independent and don't cower under some victim pretense. A beer is good but an 18 year-old Scotch is even better. She could also light my premium cigars for me as well.

Realistically speaking when men and women has been granted the same rights in the eyes of the law feminism has been rendered redundant.Feminist legal theory also do not make sense, is based on the belief that the law has been instrumental in women's historical subordination(alleged subordination).In addition feminist legal theory is dedicated to changing women's status through a reworking of the law.

Philosophically speaking a perfect reversal of situation would occur if men became gender subordinated by the law.

Ah, there's that word again. Just cry "misogynist" and that answers everything for you. Too bad you are unable to dissect any of the many facts I've presented. Perhaps I've presented too many and it overwhelms you.

I'll try to make this easier for you. Let's take one truth at-a-time: I'll focus on a specific point of contention so that you can address it unequivocally. We all know the incredible amount of attention given to breast cancer and its unfortunate impact on women. Prostate cancer affects men in about the same proportion. Yet, for more than 4 decades, the amount of attention and money given to breast cancer is substantially higher than that given to men, let alone the many 'pink celebrations' that abound for it.

From the link: "According to estimates from the "National Institutes of Health," in the United States in 2010, 207,090 women will get new cases of breast cancer.... while 39,840 women will likely die from the disease. The estimated new cases of prostate cancer this year ...is 217,730, while it is predicted 32,050 will die from the disease."

Of the total amount of money allotted to research both breast and prostate cancer and despite the virtual equality of cancer cases, women receive 69% of breast cancer funding. Men receive 31% of prostate cancer funding. (Society continues to be more protective of women in this and many other areas)

Specifically, do you 'feel' that this is equality and precisely explain the discrepancy in funding.

I've been reading this thread from the beginning. I can't be bothered to contributesubstantially to various points made because there is too much frothing and obvious seething hatred from some posters on here. Also, good soundly reasoned arguments are ignored because they don't fit with certain viewpoints. Confirmation bias is rife while academic reading and a basic knowledge of sociology and history seem to be severely lacking.

It's really kind of sad that there is so much ignorance perpetrated by some of the most prolific posters. I puts Poland in a bad light and tbh I'm bored of posting here because of the astounding logical hoops some posters seem to jump through.

F-stop and Englishman, you guys have put un an astounding effort. Thanks for showing that not all living in Poland are bereft of critical thought.

Really some of the opinions about "women" on this thread are shameful.

Oh great another woman has come on here to state how offended she is. You're offended? So what?
Would some feminist supporter please get on here and get to specifics. Vague references to belittling, having an archaic mindset or not understanding feminism are all well and good if all you can do is feign indignation every page of this thread but trust us, we get it, you've chosen to be offended can you get over yourselves already?

Zimmy, whom I don't agree with on everything, has made numerous offers for any of you to take up a specific point of debate and then have it out.


Those are astute observations and based on what I've seen male subordination seems to be the goal of more than a few feminists. For many of them, their motivation to change the law seems to stem more from a revenge mentality than one of genuine fairness.

I'll be the first to admit there is not equality in various aspects of life for men or women. And I have no problem shouting down bogus arguments against feminism. But feminists stepped over the line when they decided to start undermining the place of males in society instead of just defending female's. If it wasn't for that, I'd most likely be supportive of the movement but it was hijacked a long time ago and is wildly off-course.

I wonder if there'll be any developments when I get back...

Right on! The backlash to feminism has been caused by radical feminists who have launched a frontal attack on too many things. If they had concentrated on equal pay for equal job performance, they would have probably been more successful in that area and would enjoy wider public backing than trying to upset the apple cart. Instead they have attacked:

-- What they call the 'patriarchal' (meaning normal traditional) family, insisting that housekeeping and child-rearing are somehow demeaning and not worthy of a modern women, thereby alienating many females as well.

-- The language by insisting that time-honoured words and expressions be replaced with exotic thought-up neologisms: flight attendant, chairperson, humankind, etc. Will they soon be calling the manual gearbox the humanual transmission?

-- The Catholic Church which they accuse of discrimination for its fidelity to the tradition of the 12 Apostles. Will they soon be called 'apostlettes'? God the Father is to be replaced by God the Mother and Father...

- Alleged workplace inequality but bidding for cushy, well-paid, decision-making posts and leaving the hard, dirty and dangerous jobs to men. Ever heard any feminists clamouring to be allowed to work as 'dustpersons'?

-- The male half of the species with every manner of misandric notions and off-the-wall gender theories aimed at demeaning and emasculating males.
I am referring to RADICAL FEMINISTS with a chip on their shoulder, not ordinary women concerned about jobs opportunities, promotions, supporting their families. The radicals seem to be playing a game of one-upmanship, scoring points, always landing on top and trying to destroy the enemy.

Hey, we all have to live on this planet. And we are homo sapiens (sadly all too often only homo ludens!) first and foremost. Nationality, politics and gender are further down the line.

I didn't say I was offended. The shame belongs to those touting illogical rubbish which is gravitating around their own confirmation bias. So you can keep your label of "offended" and also keep your straw man effigies of "offended women" coming out in their droves.

There is no point in arguing specifics with people who when confronted with widely accepted accepted ideas and stats by the vast majority of sociologists, in response give out rather dubious statistics for rather dubious sources. In this way it's like trying to argue with creationists. It doesn't matter what evidence you show. It is simply ignored as people have invested too much ego and emotion into it.


As for this: as with every social, or political movements there are radicals in every corner. My question to you is what kind of feminist are you (as well as others) addressing here?

Social feminism?
Marxist feminism?
Sex positive feminism?
Reformist feminism?
I-feminism?
Radical Feminism?
Cultural feminism?
Difference feminism?
Liberal feminism>

Because all these groups have vastly different ideas of what feminism is, and how to tackle inequality, some of whom are also taking on angles of politics, gender, sexuality and race.

FWIW, I think modern radical feminists have done a hell of a lot of damage to the egalitarianism of feminist movement. As with most movements, the ones who shout the most get the most attention (and usually these people come from a biased position to start with). Other feminists are actively trying to repair the damage caused by these screaming idiots, but I don't actually expect the nuances and the history to be discussed here - partly because no one here seems to be bothered about reading any of the vast streams of literature on the subject - relying solely on "feelings" but mainly because of the vast lack of cranial ability of the most prominent "screamers" on this forum, and their inability to tell the difference between good and bad research.

For those interested, here's a link describing the different socio-political aspects of the feminist movement. Which ones do you agree with?

Knock yourselves out. Or don't.

sparkcharts.sparknotes.com/womens/womens/section4.php

Would you be so kind as to brefly define each, please? Some seem obvious but I-feminiss (Internet?) and difference feminism? Does Christian feminism exist? There are such things as Christian socialism and Christian anthropology, after all.

Click on the link provided. It's all there for you.

You, Polonius, are a cultural feminist.

Cultural feminism: Focuses on women's inherent differences from men, including their "natural" kindness, tendencies to nurture, pacifism, relationship focus, and concern for others. Opposes an emphasis on equality and instead argues for increased value placed on culturally designated "women's work."

As for i-feminsim
lmgtfy.com/?q=i-feminism

And yes, there is also Christian feminism
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_feminism

Wow! I've never been called that before!
I was so engrossed in your list that I overlooked the link. Many dzięks. You learn something every day.

Thanks Gabi for the link to descriptions of the different strands of feminist thought. I notice that one or two of the more strident anti-feminists on this thread came from a start point of deriding what they see as a 'professional' feminist class, who use money from the EU and governments to fund their own campaigns, and who profess to speak for all women.

While I support most feminist ideals and policies, I too am an enthusiast for a smaller state and the promotion of individual liberty; probably the feminist strand I most closely identify with is the so-called I-feminist (or individual feminist) one. Among other things, I-feminists treasure the personal freedoms of individual women so, for instance, they do not deride women who choose to be home-makers or stay-at-home mothers and they recognise that most women are straight and like nice clothes and looking good.

So I wonder whether Polonius, Zimmy and others might be willing to concede that while they might not agree with some strands of feminist thought, this one group of feminists - which I'd guess is one of the larger ones, having the support of most women - is actually one worthy of backing.

I have repeatedly said I support equal pay for equal perfperformance. No-one should be discriminated or ostracised JUST for being a woman, or a man for that matter. And I have been officially delcared a cultrual feminist. While I was intially shocked, I humbly accept that title. I do not particulary like the terms feminist and feminism, and brought up masculinism with tognue in cheek only to show how ludicrous those -isms are. Humanism is a far better label and approach.

We all share the same planet and should complement one another, not pursue a 'hurray for our side' mentality. As a traditionalist, I do not particularly fancy attacks on religion, the language and the traditional family

I did notice that some female posters got hot under the collar at what they perceived as an attack on women where none existed. Mentioning the potential disruption of the workplace caused by maternity and to a lesser extent by monthly health issues and PMS is not an attack on woman but a question how to resolve the problem. Should the employer alone bear the entire brunt of the consequences? Can he be condemned if he prefers to hire a male rather than a female with the same qualificaitons, since in the first case he will avoid those problems. And the question of more funding for breast cancer than prostate cancer research, unequal sporting competitions and leaving the hard, dirty and danagerous jobs to men are not attacks. They are issues that should be calmly discussed. But often even trying to discuss them earns one the label of a mysoginist.