Feminism: The ideological movement that advocates for equal rights for women based on the grounds they're equal to men.

Meninism: The ideological movement that advocates for equal rights for men based on the ground that there's inequality in major factions of society that continues to persist even after the last decades.

Egalitarianism: The belief all men and women are equal.

I have issues with all 3 of these ideologies(The general population of these ideologies.) Obviously, I do, otherwise I wouldn't be CPT Axis. Let me begin.

FEMINISM:

Feminism, in 1900s made massive strides for equality between men and women. They earned the right to vote, they earned equal pay, they earned the right to work. Feminism recently, however, has become one of the worst and most hated ideologies in the west, today. This is due to a few reasons:

The militant group hijacking the movement: Feminism has become a militant group. They will attack -physically and emotionally- people simply for holding separate viewpoints. This has caused the general public to realise Feminism has become a corrupt, social terrorist movement. It is also a leading cause for less than 40% of women in the UK to label themselves "Feminist."

Consistency in false claims: This is straight forward. Feminists constantly spew statistics that have been completely abolished multiple times. The Wage Gap being the main one. 77 cents per $1 a man makes. This is false and true. It's not a wage gap, it's an income gap. The wage gap doesn't exist, there is none. This being a wage gap means that Feminists haven't taken into account all the necessary factors needed to make this statistic. However, the income gap exists. That is the 77 cents per $1 a man makes. This DOES take into account all the factors. Women don't work as long as men, they choose to take more time off, etc. Etc. This isn't bad, that just means their income is less.

Institutional sexism: What law is sexist in intent? All women can work, all women are paid equally, all women have access to healthcare, can drive, can go in public without a man. What law is sexist to women?

Internalised sexism: This is sexist itself. Ironic for a group that apparently fights sexism.

Complete denial of things that literally attack women: Muslims in Sharia zones, Muslims that want Sharia zones, those people are aggressive -and sometimes deadly- towards women. Telling people that's just not true is, funnily enough, just not true. Laws in Sharia controlled countries are sexist in intent. "Should a women be raped, she can be sold to her rapist for a sum estimated by state." If the father is not paid for the "damaged goods" the woman is executed. If the father is paid, the rapist owns the woman. Traditional Muslims are bad. Muslims coming to the west are generally good. They're escaping Sharia, thus don't want it, thus are better than those that do want it.

False allegations: This still happens, false rape allegations being the biggest ones. Have you noticed how whenever anyone runs against the democratic party in the US, there's rape allegations suddenly unveiled about them? Donald Trump was accused of rape and the "victim" remained anonymous (That's the first red flag) had no evidence (That's the second red flag) and waited until Trump ran for president (There's the last one.) Now, I'm not saying all rape allegations are false, but they're not taken seriously, because of stunts like this; they then have the audacity to claim no one takes rapes seriously and blame "white males"

MENINISM:

Meninism took prominence in early 2014, it was made as a parody of Feminism. It was a joke. Then Feminists constantly attacked it and took it seriously, and thus it became serious. Today, it is continued to be used as a joke, but tried to be a serious movement and few people continue to use the word seriously with a genuine meaning. People have realised Meninism is a joke and drifted away because:

Literally being a joke: I know the word "literally" has been bastardised in recent years, but I mean it's real meaning. Meninism was made as a joke, remained a joke, and yet became a bigger joke. Those using the banner actually hurt the banner more from being a serious movement, by using the same rhetoric they were against Feminists using. They also refused to debate anyone.

Refusal to debate anyone: No matter whether it was a Feminist, a neutral, or another Meninist, a Meninist never debated anyone. They resorted to vulgarities, personal attacks, baseless comments. There was no debate between them, just spouting nothing.

It's attempt at seriousness thwarted: This attempt was thwarted... By it's own members. The members using the title destroyed it's ability to be serious, because they didn't take it seriously. Obviously, if they took themselves too seriously, they'd become a bigger joke. But, they didn't take themselves seriously enough.

EGALITARIANISM: 

Egalitarianism gained popularity when Feminism and Meninism showed themselves to be massive jokes - around 2015/2016. 

My personal hatred for this one can be summarised in one point: Superiority complex. 
Whenever you speak to someone about equality and they claim to be "egalitarian" they are using that to one-up Feminism and Meninism at the same time. They will just bring it up for no reason other than to tell you and let you know. It isn't a movement, it's a title, nothing more.

Pseudo-Glossary:

Sexism: The belief one sex is greater than another.
Wage: How much a person is paid per hour.
Income: How much a person takes home when they're given their pay cheque.
Sharia: The law of the country or region based off the beliefs taught by/in the Qu'ran.
Ideology: A system of ideas and ideals held by a group of people.

You make a few good points but I feel like there's some flaws in what you have said as well. Firstly I agree that the "wage gap" has been source of a lot of myths but you're making it sound like that is the only issue facing women people are debating. There are still many problems facing both men and women in western society. These typically don't stem from the legal system itself nor is that what modern mainstream feminism is arguing. It has more to do with people's perceptions and the idea of gender roles which is still very prevalent in society. For instance there have been examples of female rape victims being shamed for "wearing s***ty clothes".

Feminism by definition does not advocate female superiority or even that women are the only ones facing problems. Feminism itself isn't an ideology either, but rather a collection of different ideologies and movements dealing with gender equality. The common factor being that they all advocate gender equality. Disagreements in how this is to be achieve can therefore exist between feminists. Therefore if you advocate the idea of gender equality regardless of if you believe in there being a wage gap or not you would still be considered a feminist.

Most people who call themselves feminist do in fact acknowledge that men face problems again stemming from this ideas of gender roles. This hate that has developed among many is based on the statements made by a minority which is then people view as representative of the whole movement, you're making a straw man. This leads onto your point about egalitarianism which while possibly true to some extent I think it also stems from people not realizing the true meaning of feminism to begin with. Thinking it's only about this form of radical feminism due to false impressions. Another factor is the term itself, in other words simply how it's called feminism which I think is one of the intial things that drive people away from it. That makes a whole lot more sense though if you consider the historical context in which it came to be, the struggle for womens rights.

On to sharia there are a lot of misconceptions about this and you did mention the fact that not all muslims advocate sharia. However I still think more needs to be added onto this. Speaking as someone who lives in a western country and have muslim family/friends people who do advocate some form of sharia being implemented, they typically aren't advocating that "women should be stoned" or anything of the sort but rather it's usually dealing mainly with marriage settlements, having religious courts that one can turn to if they want to. Similarly to how many other religious beliefs in the US for example are allowed to have their own court when it comes to such matters.

The part of sharia law you are talking about is something people not just in western countries but many muslim dominated countries as well where religion is separate from state (Turkey and Azerbajdzjan for example) are against implementing. The problem has to do more with society and the fact that this mindset is pushed onto the population by the government as most of the countries where support for Sharia is high are also dictatorships. Now of course there exist the extremists who still want full sharia law to be implemented in society despite living in a democracy however the same goes for any religion. There are extremists everywhere.

I agree with you when it comes to meninism. However I would add that a lot of the people who take it seriously seem to adhere to ideology that men are somehow being opressed. In other words even if it does become a serious movement, I don't see how it is any better than the radical feminism most people are against which is something you didn't seem to bring up.

I didn't make it sound like that was the only thing women face. In fact, I literaly said they didn't face it at all, because it doesn't exist.

Mainstream Feminism is the militant group that hijacked the movement. Hence the rest of the section on Feminism.

Traditional gender roles are advocated for because they are what each sex is inherently good at. It is an innate thing that men are the dominant ones and women the submissive. It is seen in the majority of animals and throughout human history.

There have been examples of male rape victimes being called "p*ssy" and other vulgarities. That's not a gendered issue. If you look at it, rape among males is actually worse, because there is a higher stigma for male rape victims. There are fewer hotlines for male rape victims. Also, honestly, who besides pre-pubescent teenagers blame the victims clothes? Can you give me any evidence to support that claim?

I never said feminism advocated female superiority or that they're the only ones facing problems. I gave the literal textbook definition of it and history of Feminism.

A collection of ideologies is an ideology. They're a group based on ideas. Feminism is definitely an ideology.

False, agreeing with certain points does not make you as such. Example: I agree some people make too much money. Am I socialist? No. Merely agreeing with gender equality doesn't make you a feminist and that's actually another reason people are turned away from it. They try force indoctrinate people into the ideology and it makes people hate it more.

Once again, false, most people who call themselves feminists today are the militant or "radical" feminists spoken about earlier. As said, less than 40% of the UK's female popuation consider themselves feminist. Everyone has seen their beliefs. They're also the reason feminism's name has been bastardized. It no longer means equality, and actually means superiority. Such is the way when a group is taken over.

If this group is "the minority" then answer this: why did the majority let it happen? Why are they not stopping it? Why are they so passive about it?
They either don't care enough or they agree. They're the only two reasons.

You keep bringing up the original meaning for feminism, which you can't, because the original meaning no longer exists. The meaning has been destroyed by the radicals hijacking the group - the main point of the entire feminist part.

I didn't say they were advocating that specifically, I was giving an example of what Sharia entails. It is discriminatory against women, homosexuals, and others they deem unnecessary.

If it's so oppossed in Muslim dominated countries, why do they allow it? If the majority does indeed hate it so much, why not rise up against it? Groups have risen up to implement it, but not vice versa. That screams a lot.

The difference between Muslim extremists and other religions is other religions aren't blowing up every day. Other religions have had a reform and the core beliefs are different than they were 3000 years ago. Christianity follows the new testament which promotes love more than anything. The Qu'ran still goes by its ancient beliefs. The beliefs Sharia is derived from. If Muslims hate Sharia so much, why do they continue to follow the Qu'ran so much? Seems counter-intuitive.

Men in America are actually worse of than woman, today. More women go to college, more women graduate college, more men die in the work place, more omen aged 18-25 have higher paying jobs, men are less likely to win custody battles, men have less outlets for all emotional help. Tell me, where in weatern countries are women more oppressed than men?

CPT Axis : Mainstream feminism doesn't argue that strictly women are affected negatively by gender inequality. The fault lies more in how it focuses on women's issues, ask the vast majority of people who are "mainstream feminists" if they believe gender inequality is stricly an issue affecting women and they would say no.

"men are the dominant and the women the submissive"

This is the idea feminism as a whole is against. That we need to adhere to certain gender roles. It's about people of both genders having the same opportunities, being able to choose how to live for themselves and through that also acknowledging that we are all different as individuals. You shouldn't make a generalization about a person just based on their gender. In the past embracing these differences made sense because it was key to our survival, we've reached a point now where that no longer is the case. Our minds are more important than our physical features.

I never said rape is a women only issue, hence why I said "female" rape victims as in acknowledging the existance of male rape victims as well. I just gave an example of how it affects women negatively. There are of course issues facing men as well such as male rape being taken less seriously.

Yes I admit I worded it poorly there. What I meant is that the common thread within feminism is that they advocate gender equality. So if you advocate the idea of gender equality (regardless if you believe this is to be achieved based on tackling issues both sexes face or that one sex is affected more than the other and therefore needs to be focused on) you are still a feminist from an ideological perspective. True you can still reject the label of feminist but ideologically your views would align if you advocate gender equality and that was the point I was trying to get across.

Let what happen? Let them pratice freedom of speech. I don't see how mainstream feminism is saying that only women face issues even if that's the impression that some may get. That seems to be the assumption people make by only focusing on the radical part of feminism. It's perhaps focusing on women's issues which I'm not advocating but that is still feminism if that's how people believe gender equality is to be achieved.

People are against it in SOME muslim dominated countries like Turkey and Azerbadjan. In other countries the majority are for it. My whole point is that it has more to do with society and the people essentially being indoctrinated into a way of thinking by their government. You seem to agree that one religion isn't inherently more "evil" than the other, but it rather has to do with people's perceptions changing. The same is happening with muslims across the world both in the west as well as in many muslim dominated countries. It happens naturally from freedom and exposure to democratic ideals. People may still follow the Qu'ran closely compared to how many self proclaimed Christians ignore the bible even in western countries but I don't see how that matters if they're not going out stoning homosexual people or beating women. Besides it will likely change over time. In any case let people believe and practice what they want to when it doesn't affect others. 

"Groups have risen up to implement it". I would assume you're talking about ISIS and if so I really don't understand your point. It is a terrorist organization which on top of that receives funding from dictatorships like Saudi Arabia. They have power which gives them the ability to have more of a direct impact. Most people from western countries who choose to follow ISIS do so less out of an existing strong religious conviction and are rather influenced being young and impressionable. What exactly are you expecting a muslim not part of ISIS to do? Give up their lives and go fight ISIS just because they also call themselves muslims? Form a group called the Anti ISIS organization?

I disagree. You're only focusing on one side on the issue which I don't see as any different as the part of feminism you're arguing against. It's true that men face many problems today. However the same is true for women. Women are often forced into the role of being a caregiver and taking care of the household. More women are raped, more women are victims of domestic abuse. I agree that mainstream feminism seem to focus on tackling women's issues but it doesn't say that men aren't affected negatively. That's the radical part of feminism. Besides that I think it's understandable that main stream feminists think women's issues should be focused on when they seem resistance to feminism based on what to them seems to be not wanting equal rights for women. Not advocating it just explaining how it continues to be that way.

Again gender inequality affects both men and women and I think that's why both sides of the issue need to be discussed. Otherwise progress is never going to be made as you will be ignoring the problems facing half the population. In stead what happens is what we see now. People are driven apart. The whole debate right now is centered around the label of feminism which is frankly irrelevant to to the matter at hand when most people seem to actually agree that both men and women are affected by gender inequality.

I also don't understand your logic here. You mentioned that women are submissive and seem to think that women are more suited to be caregivers. So by that logic it should naturally be expected that women win more custody battles. It should also be expected that men would have a harder time getting emotional help because they are the protectors and therefore need to show emotional strength thereby be expected to handle more of their emotional health on their own. 

Women get paid less then men ONLY when they are a prostitute working for a pimp

Seriously though that is like saying those with college degrees make more then those without it. It's not entirely true in all cases it depends on the industry and who the boss is and how they run the joint.

Trump allegedly raped or touched several women.... well guess what? JFK and Bill Clinton had affairs WHILE THEY WERE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!! Bill did Monica IN THE FRECKIN WHITE HOUSE OVAL OFFICE WITH A CIGAR!!! JFK on the other hand was doing M&M and who knows who else.

There is obviously a very good reason why JFK's head got blown off in a motorcade and also a very good reason why some women wait 10 to 20 years to report a celebrity rape.... for profit or benefit.

Very true,JigSaw. A lot of "victims" will not say a word until they see an opportunity for advancement or to hurt someone,be it baseless or not. I am not saying it does not happen,nor am I saying that victims stay quiet out of fear and shame,I am just saying they seem to come out of the woodwork when they smell profit or revenge. Men usually want vengeance right then and there,women will wait for vengeance.





 

I don't think you understand that the radical/militant feminists have become the mainstream feminists. They're the most known, thus are the face and definition of feminism. Because that's how ideologies work. The viewpoint most noteable is the viewpoint of the ideology.

It's not a gender role, it's a biological evolution. Men are physically superior. Thus men are more dominant. As a general rule. Where is Western societies don't they have equal oppertunities? You haven't given a single answer.

"Minds are more importnt than physical features"
That's the most incorrect thing I've ever read. If I shoot you, you're not going to suddenly shout save my brain, you'll shout save me. Why? Because they're equally important.

I didn't say you said rape is only a female issue. I said men suffer from rape more. Which is just fact.

But, once afain, feminism's ideology has changed, because the loudest in the ideology have bastardized the movement, thus given it negative anti-equality connotations. That's how groups work.

Anyone can practice free speech. Except free speech means the government can't arrest you for saying certain things. You can silence anyone as a personal individual, because you're a private entity. The constitution was made to stop government interference, not public. So, you don't have to stop them speaking, but you could. In any note, I think we both know you knew that's not what I meant or said. I said "why not stop them" meaning why not stop them hijacking the movement? Because they either don't care or agree.

Refer to point of mainstream feminism being radical/militant, you get your answer.

I'm all for them practicing their religion if it doesn't affect others. Except, a lot of Muslims want Sharia law, you said that yourself. Sharia law is inherently evil, so what parts could they specifically want that won't affect others? Traditional Muslims are everywhere, they are the threat to people and I would rather not have them, because they are a problem. Western Muslims, sure, they've been here long enough, they know democracy isn't bad, the western civilisation is actually the best, etc. But when a Muslim protests for Sharia law, you can see where everyone goes "hey, hold up, what's happening."
In London we have Sharia law zones. They don't overrule national courts, but they have the zones which allow Sharia law to be implemented, until it affects other people. Do you really want to wait for the "over time" why not take action now? Waiting makes you the prey, as we've seen from countless Muslim attacks in 2016.

No, and sarcasm doesn't bode well in an argument. But, the same with Feminists. If you are passive about it, but complain you get a bad rep, it's 100% your fault, because you aren't doing anything to stop or change it. As with Feminism, religion is also ideological. The mainstream view of Islam is bad, so why accept it happening? Either: they don't care enough, or they agree.

False, what you mean is there are more reports of female rapes and more reports of female domestic abuse. But, even false rape claims are counted in the rale statistics, women are also more likely to lie about being raped, lie about domestic abuse. So their statistic is skewed anyway.

Again, mainstream feminism and radical feminism are the same, you're saying it as if they're two seperate entities which they aren't. The mainstream of something is the majority view of that thing. The majority view is Feminism is militant/radical, the only people who don't see it that way are the ones who call themselves feminist.

If both suffer gender equality, doesn't that mean they're equal? Or do some men/some women suffer more? Also, if they suffer more, what do they suffer more by? What can we do to change it and what would it be replaced with?

You assumed I said they were better caregivers. I never implied that. In fact, the majority of children being abused is by women. Single mothers are worse off than single fathers. Biologically, women are better caregivers, but that doesn't mean it translates well into practice. It just means it's easier for them to get a hold of it and become attached. But, you see, that's biology. The law system doesn't give fair trial to males, because they're males.

So, if biology says something, you act accordingly right? Well, a debate from feminists is transgendered people are the gender they decide, but that's not biology. Should we follow biological law or should be not? Or should it be a pick and choose case? If it's a pick and choose case, isn't that convenient biology only matters when it helps them.

CPT Axis : No they aren't mainstream feminists. "Mainstream" is whatever is followed by the majority of feminists. The majority of feminists agree that gender inequality affects both men and women though many may choose to focus on women's issues. People against feminism only acknowledge the radical feminists while ignoring the rest.

Similarly just because ISIS pops up a lot in the news that doesn't automatically make ISIS mainstream islam. ISIS make up a minority of muslims. ISIS have declared the population of Indonesia (which has the largest muslim population of any country) infidels. Anyone who does some research would know this. That's not the fault of muslims or feminists for not "stopping them from hijacking the movement" that's people being ignorant by only acknowledging a certain part of said belief and eating up what biased media outlets tell them.

I feel like you're not actually reading my post properly. I stated that problems due to gender inequality are typically caused more by people's perceptions and less by laws being unfair in the western world. The legal system in a country like the US I would say is generally on the right track. The problem is more about the attitude people have which causes more inequalities to exist.

How does that at all relate to my argument? Sure in a fight physical strength might be more important but living in the western world is for most people not a day to day struggle for survival. Assuming you're not stupid or unlucky what are the actual chances of you having a gun pointed at you? Furthermore how is increased physical strength going to save you anyway when you're facing a gun? Minds are more important because it's generally what determines if you'll be prosperous. It allows you to get a good education to get a lucrative job. Furthermore even if you're in a life or death situation, those who are smart enough to know how to defend themself is generally going to be better off than someone who just has brute physical strength. Intelligence and wit is far more important.

"That's not a gendered issue" is your exact wording. Either way It's not a fact. If anything women are estimated to be raped more so purely statistically women suffer more from rape. Sure you can guestimate that because male rape isn't taken as seriously leads to men suffering more overall but that can't be proven, therefore it is not a fact.

Again just because a certain group appears in media more that doesn't make it mainstream.

Because they cannot "hijack" it. Feminism is not an organization neither is Islam.

I said that most muslims in democratic countries do not advocate that form of sharia. Purely statistically in most western countries and even in muslims countries where religion is separate from state (like the ones I mentioned) people don't advocate it. Some people want religious courts similar to how those exist within other beliefs in the US but that would be a different matter. They are strictly voluntarily to attend and deal mainly with spiritual matters. That's not forcing anyone to follow a belief they don't agree with so why should it be stopped? 

I'm not being sarcastic. If you're getting that impression then let me just ask you directly, what exactly are you expecting muslims to do? You still haven't stated it. Again refer to what I said previously in this post as to why radical feminism and ISIS seemingly being the most vocal does not make it mainstream.

More women being affected by rape would naturally lead to more women lying about it as well. What can be said is that according to a study done by the department of justice in the US, 1 in 6 women claim to have been the victim of at least attempted rape while only 1 in 33 men say the same and sure while the numbers may be skewed to some extent here it seems highly unlikely that the majority of men and/or women would flat out lie in what is an anonymous investigation that gets them no benefit. Pure statistics seem to indicate that women are in fact being raped more.

I don't think it's possible to gauge if one gender suffers more than the other, there will always be perspectives that aren't considered and how would we even go about gauging suffering? Either way I don't see how it matters. We need to tackle both sides of the issue because that's the only thing that will lead to progress. Focusing on just one side of the issue like you seem to be doing, or what mainstream feminism does is just going to lead to fighting as one is essentially ignoring the problems facing half the population. I don't agree with mainstream feminism but that does not stop me from calling myself a feminist.

You just said "biologically women are better caregivers". Then it would make sense that more women are involved in cases of children being abused because more women would be raising children to begin with. You're saying the legal system is biased towards males, but if women are more suited to be caregivers then naturally women will win more custody battles. The bias would be natural to have. I don't agree with this being the way things should be, I'm just basing it on the logic you seem to be using. 

There is no "biological law" like there is laws within physics and chemistry. You're making that up. One could argue that there is a biological basis for why a person would want to get a sex change to begin with so wouldn't that mean it's in accordance with biology? Either way how does it matter? Getting a sex change does not stop a person from being a rational human being who contributes to society so why does it need to be stopped?

If it's on the basis that the process itself of getting a sex change is unnatural we've never let that stop us in the past. Building huge cities and roads, dumping huge amounts of nuclear waste deep into the earth can all be considered unnatural.

Men and women both have their own hardships and in that regard are more or less equal. There's no real discrimination or inequality nowadays, we've left that sort of thing behind. Anyone who is a feminist or meninist is probably really silly, immature, or just really dumb.

Especially if they're a woman

Zlinqx : Actually, mainstream is the biggest representation of something or someone. So, because media representation of Feminism shows what I have said about them, that is the mainstream of Feminism. Also, due to it being an ideology, the mainstream is what is the definition, as it's the representative of the entire group. Feminism started purely for women's issues, and the literal definition of original feminism stays the same - The avocation of women's rights, based on the belief that they're of equal standing to men.

Actually, yes, it does. Mainstream, once again, is the biggest representation of something or someone. Yes, ISIS makes up a minority, but their beliefs do not. Studies of Muslim populations in Britain actually show a lot of Muslims believe Sharia law is the best way to regulate the population. ISIS too want Sharia law, but they go by every factor of Sharia. To speak about your point of ISIS calling Indonesian Muslims "infidels" an infidel is someone who doesn't fit the Sharia definition to the point. They're what is considered more liberal Muslims. AKA - not totally for Sharia law, but in Indonesia, Muslims do follow parts of Sharia law, which, as we have all learned, does not fit into Western societies, but is still considered by them to be morally right. I don't follow bias media outlets for my facts, I look at both extreme sides (Fox News and CNN) then do research on the topic myself, to form an opinion. This, I found, is the best way to ensure factual certainty, or personal fault.

Yes, people have the wrong attitude, meaning the mainstream Feminists that have caused more problems than they've solved last year. A bigger problem is politicians see these people also as the majority of the country, when, in fact, they're not. So, because of this, politicians will pander to them and try to please them, to avoid any massive backlash, this is another problem with the mainstream feminist movement. People's perceptions of Feminism come from the mainstream view of Feminism, which is what those under the banner of Feminism promote.

For the "Men are dominant and women are submissive" my point was actually backing it up. Throughout the evolution of males and females, males have always been submissive. You can't fight biology, no matter how much you try. For proof of that, a transgender MMA fighter (Male to female) had the treatment to change from male to female - have all the hormones and parts taken/added. And, even with all that, he dominates every woman competitor. Biologically, men are superior, no amount of protest can change innate behaviour.

In Detroit, as a black person, you're more likely to be shot than any other crime happen to you. So, unless you class being born as unlucky, your argument for that part has just been destroyed. Also, as a police officer in Detroit, last year, they suffered heavy causalities, due to racism promoted by the BLM movement in that area - The mainstream BLM movement. Physical strength actually affects how likely you are to die from a bullet wound. A physically fit person, someone like MMA's Brock Lesnar has a higher chance to survive a bullet wound than someone who is anorexic. 

"Minds determine generally if you'll be prosperous" Depends. If you're hired to be a professional wrestler, you can be as dumb as you want, but you'll still make a lot of money, if you're successful. Take a look at Ryback from WWE, he has awful mic skills, but can fight and is tough. HE clearly is more physically imposing than mentally, but still has a good paycheck. 

"who are smart enough to know how to defend themselves is generally going to be better off than someone who just has brute physical strength." Well, tell me this, I'll go back to the gun point. If you're smart, how do you get out of it? Say it's someone like Jeffrey Dhamer who just wants to kill you. How do you get out of it, if you're smart? You can try to run, which has a very minimal chance of working. If you're strong, you can fight back and have a higher chance of escape. In general, both physical and mental are equally important. Arguing pro-one or the other is stupid.

Actually, it is a fact, there is a higher stigma for male rape victims than for female rape victims. That's proven purely by the amount of centres dedicated to helping female rape victims. If you look at statistics purely, you don't get the whole picture, so, from a purely statistical standpoint, sure, female rape happens more. However, if you look at statistical evidence purely, you also come to the conclusion that the gender wage gap exists, which has been disproved countless times, so it's not a smart thing to do to go purely from statistics. You need to count all factors. So your "you can guesstimate ale rape isn't taken seriously" has been disproved there. It's not a guesstimate to say male rape isn't taken seriously, it's an observable truth.

Yes, it does, if it's an ideology. It becomes the face of the ideology, and thus, the group as a whole is shown to be as such. This sort of thing has happened throughout history and constantly happens today. They're viewed as one thing, thus they are, because that's how ideologies work. The loudest/most mainstream of them become the representation of the group, thus the group becomes that.

No, it's not an organisation, they're ideologies, which CAN be hijacked. 

There is no "That form of Sharia" it is "That part of Sharia" .eg. Half of Muslims in Britain support Anti-homosexuality - which is a part of Sharia, and is immoral. In Sweden, rapes of Swedish women have been reported on constantly, which is another part protected by Sharia law. "If a man rapes a woman, he must pay dowry to the father, and become the husband. Or the woman shall be executed by state." The rape stayed, but the rest left. Religious courts have been historically proven to be a bad idea. We have religious zones of Sharia in London, but those courts don't overrule British courts. If a murder takes place, they're tried in British courts. They're there for religious code breaking. Which, for Muslims, make it a compromise on British laws too, because they have Sharia courts, which, as we know, will kill someone for abandoning Islam. However, it's still a problem, even if it doesn't conflict with British laws, because it means there is a part of the country which is no longer under full British rule, which is a compromise on our Sovereignty. Which, after Brexit, hopefully will no longer exist.

Except it does. As I've stated and explained multiple times now. In an ideology, the loudest/most prominent voice is the representation of the ideology. If massive amounts of republicans started killing black people, you'd call all republicans racist. Why? Because it's how ideologies work.

However, with the rape study, different people class rape as different things. Some people considered "Mansplaining" rape. Others consider being looked at rape. There are certain things going into this study that haven't been seen. And, what do you know, these false rape claims are by the feminists that are the mainstream. That's why Feminism is a joke too, which I missed out in the original post. Pure statistics, as said above, are misleading. Also, even when anonymous, men will most likely lie about it, due to masculinity problems. Women will most likely lie about it, due to attention problems - another biological characteristic. Women are more likely to desire attention, where men are more likely to want to seem dominant.

It's impossible to judge which gender suffers more, unless you look at it purely numerically. Women face 12 problems, men face 12, therefore they're equally disadvantaged. (That was a hypothetical example, not a literal one) Yes, we do need to tackle all problems, but there are problems feminists are trying to fight that can't be fought. That is what I'm doing. I attacked all 3 groups, not just one, remember. After that, I've been arguing against your points for each part. Call yourself what you want, but you should realise that you're accepting all the criticism coming with it, due to the loudest part of your ideology.

Biologically, they are, that's a fact. Actually, to be more specific, single mothers are the most common to abuse children. AKA: Mothers without a husband/boyfriend/father figure. I'm saying the legal system is biased AGAINST males. Women are more suited to be caregivers, because they take more time off, have the biology to feed them at any time, are generally able to spend more time with them. The problem here is custody battles tend to look purely at the gender, which is something Mainstream Feminism does not cover, which is a big reason Meninism became a thing... A very stupid thing, but a thing nonetheless. The bias is not natural to have, especially in the current year where men and women are the most equal they've ever been.

There is actually a biological law. Human males have penises, that's a biological law. If they don't have a penis when born(And aren't female,) that's a deformity. If there's not a biological law, then deformities wouldn't exist. It's not a biological basis for someone wanting a sex change, it's a psychological one. Actually, it does, people with gender dysphoria, tend to kill themselves at the same rate before and after conversion, so changing doesn't matter, but they're still not a mentally normal person. Fortunately, the conversion I don't care about, because THEY have to pay for it. Even in the UK, conversion treatment is self-funded, because it's cosmetic, which isn't paid for by the NHS.

Sex changes actually are unnatural, by definition. So are cities, roads, certain types of waste, etc. However, the difference is one doesn't cause or is the effect of people being mentally not-normal. It was classed as a mental disorder, and still is, by definition. But certain groups of people got mad, because mental disorders are bad, so they protested and threatened people to get it overturned. But, comparing mental disorders to building is the biggest reach I've ever seen in defence of that.

CPT Axis: No, the context I'm using mainstream in is the most widely accepted/followed branch of an ideology. The mainstream "The ideas, attitudes and activities that are shared by most people and regarded as normal or coventional" (Source: Oxforddictionaries). You are correct about that being the historical and original definition of feminism but it has changed today. Today it can also be defined as "the theory of the political, economic and social equality of the sexes" (source: merriam webster).

ISIS does make up a majority. If you have statistics supporting otherwise I'd like to see because I sincerely doubt they're from a credible source. What might be possible is like what I said supporting muslim courts which is different from supporting the stoning of women.
As for calling indonesian muslims infidels that clearly shows that the biggest muslim country (based on population) does not fit the ideology of ISIS which I think also pretty clearly shows that they are extremists. I personally have relatives who live in the middle east (though not in Indonesia) and they too support me on this. People's homes, famlies basically their entire way of life is being taken away from them. Of course they want them to be stopped, more than anyone and they certainly don't identify with ISIS.

I'm sort of confused what you're arguing here. I'm not denying that mainstream feminism has problems, like I said I think focusing on woman's rights is the wrong way to go. Make no mistake I'm in agreement with you there. My point was that while most self identifying feminists think we should focus on woman rights they do acknowledge that gender inequality affects men negatively as well. However disagreeing with the mainstream of feminism does not automatically make you not a feminist. Just as being a quaker (a small denomination of Christianity) doesn't mean you aren't a Christian. There can be different interpretations and disagreements. 

"males have been submissive" I assume that was a typo and you meant females. My whole point is that you can't make a generalization based on gender. Sure men might generally have upper body strength but a female can still be born more physically able than a man. In the same way a body building female would easily win against the average man in a fight. It's not about denying biological differences it's about not having the gender roles be the norms. Letting everyone pursue the lifestyle/career they want to without feeling being forced into or feeling pressured to follow a certain way of life. Besides are you even hearing yourself? "Men are superior". Furthermore the argument you're using to discard women's issues, also works vice versa. Most of the issues you've mentioned affecting males wouldn't be a problem by that logic since they would be natural consequences of following the gender roles.

Because as we know every black person born is automatically involved in a gun shooting because they have an increased risk (that is me actually using sarcasm). Just because a certain group of people is more likely to be shot that doesn't magically destroy my argument. It's mainly the circumstances as in where you grow up that determines it. The chance of being shot is still low unless you purposely involve yourself in the sort of activity that would put you at risk. Your physique would still do little in that case.

WWE fighter is not a viable career option for the majority of people because there is a very low demand for it. That's what enables a few people to make a lot of money doing it. Sure for some people having physical strength is important but even then that doesn't make the midn unimportant. It's more important to have the discipline to work out to be able to maintain the physique needed, people won't be born ready to be an MMA fighter. Women aren't stopped either as they can pursue these sports as well. In other words mind is always going to play a part and in the vast majority of viable high paying jobs do in fact require a degree of some sort which takes intellectual capabilities.

How does an anorexic person being less likely to survive a gun shot disprove my argument? Of course, being anorexic is not healthy, that's a mental disorder. What difference is being buff going to make if someone shoots you several times? The difference physique could potentially have would still be relatively small. It's still healthier to be an average untrained person than someone who takes steroids just to maintain body strength. I can understand your viewpoint when it comes to the other things discussed but I think this argument is just ridiculous.

How is physical strength going to help you fight back against a person with a gun? Running towards the person while they're shooting at you like it's some sort of movie isn't going to work unless that person is a terrible shot. While sure mad serial killers exist the majority of shootings aren't commited by people who just kill for sport. If you're calm, quick witted you might be able to talk that person out of it, you might see an opportunity to distract them. The truth is that generally in western society the mind is generally more important than brawn. Sure exceptions exist but that's why I'm saying generally.

I'm not arguing against that male rape is taken less seriously, what I am arguing against is the conclusion that it somehow means men as a group suffer more overall of rape than women. Considering the fact that much fewer men are still raped. I'm not saying that it doesn't need to be adressed because of that either just that men do not suffer from rape more than women which is what you argued. "I said men suffer from rape more. Which is just a fact."

Looking past the fact that most people do not identify with ISIS but in fact are against them, going by your logic here, catholicism is mainstream christianity because it is the most prominent/followed and that means that catholicism is the face of christianity therefore it is Christianity. Anyone who is not a Catholic should therefore not be considered Christian... See how it doesn't make sense?

Actually rape is not common in Sweden, it has one of the lowest rape statistics in Europe, what is high is the amount of reported rapes. I should know this since I live in Sweden, on top of that I also live in Malmö (one of the most immigrant inhabited cities where almost 50% are immigrants or have at least 1 immigrant parent). The reason more rapes are reported here is because the legal definition of rape is broader more things qualify as rape. It is expanded to include acts that don't even involve anal or oral penetration. Taking all of this into consideration it isn't particularly strange. Really the whole rumor that Sweden is a rape capital was a misconception started by right wing symphatizers due to lack of research in terms of what actually defines rape.

If as you're saying women are suited to be caregivers then why is it not natural to have a bias favoring women? If more women are taking care of children in terms of spending time with them then why is it not natural that more women are involved in cases of child abuse? Unless you can show that women are innately more prone to abusing children.  If men and women spent an equal amount of time with children and in the same setting then it would be another matter but that's not the case. Again just because women or men may be more prone to do something that doesn't mean they actually will. You need to look at people from the individual level, that's the only way to remain unbiased (or as close as possible). And no you shouldn't be needing to accept critique against mainstream feminist unless that's the kind of feminist you identify as. That's no different than saying that all christians need to accept critique geared towards the KKK or that protestants need to accept critique that deals with catholicism. That's the whole thing with different branches of an ideology they are formed because of disagreements and to clearly show how you differ from that group.

Indeed but there still isn't such a term as biological law. There is a biological basis for wanting a sex change. Your biology doesn't just deal with your physical biology but also how your mental state is affected. A transgender person has something called gender dysphoria which is what leads to identifying as the opposite gender. In the same way this is why non transgender people identify as their specific gender. Yes sex cannot be changed as that is what you're assigned at birth, but your gender (which is a social construct to begin with) can.

It isn't a mental disorder. It's a mental condition. A mental disorder is a mental condition that affects a person negatively. Autism is an example of a mental disorder because it restricts that person from functioning in society and in general impacts their development. Identifying as the other person does not in any way restrict a person from being a contributing functioning member of society. The only negative effects comes from the attitudes of other people which can lead to that person becoming depressed.

I largely agree with the OP, except I'd like to critique a small bit on egalitarianism.

It's totally true that people speak of "egalitarianism" under the guise of superiority. They believe in "egalitarianism", therefore they're better than you. This is a huge grievance of mine against our community as a whole, religious and non-religious. Egalitarianism should evoke humility, not superiority.

But egalitarianism is not new. It's a really old word. It was Popularized in the east with Buddhism and in the West with Christianity. Although atheist circles have taken up an egalitarian premise, the purpose of such a claim is dubious. The modern concept of egalitarianism is political, written by the political philosophers Locke and Mill. Equality is not a new thing; it is something old that is constantly repackaged to be more prudent or fashionable for contemporary proselytizing.

My position, however, is that egalitarianism is a lie in all but one morbid sense: we're all going to die.

I am likely stronger than you. I'm a big, healthy guy. We are not equal. You may be younger or older than me. We are not equal. You may be more or less competent in expressing your emotions. We are not equal. I may have better business, political, and educational connections than you. We are not equal. No one in this world is incredibly "equal". People are different.

And that there is the key: people are different. It is not the equality we celebrate (unless we wish to celebrate our death), but it is in our differences we find value.

Some feminists nowadays aren't batsh** crazy like a lot of the feminists you hear in the media. Those people, I cannot stand. A great example of someone I cannot stand is Anita Sarkeesian. I cannot imagine how dumb a person must be to have her mindset. She is one of the dumbest people I have ever heard speak, and I think I have done myself a favor when I stopped paying attention to the things she does. A lot of topics like this usually got me in a really pissy mood, but I've learned to just ignore topics like this sometimes and I won't get pissed as much. Just like now, though, I still want to give in my two cents from time to time.

All of these people who are saying stuff like, "Women are being treated unfairly" and "THE COPS ARE RACIST BLACK LIVES MATTER" are mostly full of idiots. They either have no idea what they're talking about and refuse to look at the data, or they really are just that dumb. I agree with a lot of what the first post says, but not all of it.