"Virgin shaming": I know we have a lot of "but what about men's problems?" people out there.

godofallu

New member
Jun 8, 2010
1,663
0
0
Just so we can get the biases out in the open, OP are you a man or a woman? How old are you? Are you a virgin?

I will not judge you or be mean or w.e, but I would be interested in understanding where you're coming from.

Based on the pony avatar and your opinions I can make assumptions, but you know what they say about people who assume.
 

asacatman

New member
Aug 2, 2008
123
0
0
bauke67 said:
asacatman said:
bauke67 said:
I've been reading through 2 pages of this now, and I've completely forgotten what the point was. So has everyone else, it seems.
Yes, slut shaming is bad, and yes, virgin shaming is bad.
I think pretty much anyone can agree on that, right?
I suspect that virgin shaming is not generally caused by culture but comes purely from within the person, this may be different is some cases.
I don't understand how a feminist can the oppinion of an anti-feminist to win argument against just some random person who disagrees. It makes no sense at all.
Also, everyone should be free to have his own oppinion, and not be scolded for it by everyone that disagrees.
About just your last sentence...no, if your opinion is dumb then I can call it dumb. If you think that all independant coffe shops should be purged from the earth I'm going to scold you. Equally I could be all Godwin and say if you agree with the nazis you should be scolded. This seems like a strawman, but your point was so general that I think it's okay to pick out specifics.

Some opinions are just stupid, and I tend to think that a lot of the opinions surrounding the gender issues debate are pretty stupid, mostly from Men's Rights groups.

Wow, this was a long response to just your last sentence. Sorry about that...
That's ok. But it doesn't matter wether someone thinks coffeeshops should be closed or that all Jews should be deported. Now when someone says they're actually going to close down your coffeeshop or kill a Jew, that's when you when you can scold/stop them. Opinions themselves are harmless.
Well, okay, I think we just have a different defintion of scold. I agree opinions are harmless, to a point, but I will, for example, lose all respect for you, or not be friendly to you (you in general, not, er, you) if our opinions differ in certain ways.
 

bauke67

New member
Apr 8, 2011
300
0
0
Revnak said:
I suppose that they aren't necessarily dangerous, but they are wrong. Murder is a terrible thing to value, and valuing something but not acting on it is terrible in it's own way.In my opinion believing something must reflect in your actions, or you don't really believe it.
Murder is firstly only terrible when out of context, but can be necessary if the conditions ask for it.
And valuing something but not acting something but not acting on it is usually no more than common sense.
Or do you think that if someone believes he should kill many people that he should do so? Someone may believe that it is a good thing, but also that self-preservance(or any other reason) is more important then that particular belief.
 

bauke67

New member
Apr 8, 2011
300
0
0
asacatman said:
Well, okay, I think we just have a different defintion of scold. I agree opinions are harmless, to a point, but I will, for example, lose all respect for you, or not be friendly to you (you in general, not, er, you) if our opinions differ in certain ways.
I agree with you in that, you have every right to have an opinion about someone's opinion. But if you can scold someone for that(by which I mean tell them that what they think is wrong, and trying to convince them that what you think is right), then if you had the ability t do so, why would you not force their opinion to change. In example, let's say a goverment finds a way to brainwash people, is it then right for them to forcibly change their opinions about the government, or any number of things, because that is what they think is right?
 

Revnak_v1legacy

Fixed by "Monday"
Mar 28, 2010
1,979
0
0
bauke67 said:
Revnak said:
I suppose that they aren't necessarily dangerous, but they are wrong. Murder is a terrible thing to value, and valuing something but not acting on it is terrible in it's own way.In my opinion believing something must reflect in your actions, or you don't really believe it.
Murder is firstly only terrible when out of context, but can be necessary if the conditions ask for it.
And valuing something but not acting something but not acting on it is usually no more than common sense.
Or do you think that if someone believes he should kill many people that he should do so? Someone may believe that it is a good thing, but also that self-preservance(or any other reason) is more important then that particular belief.
No, I believe that they shouldn't value murder. I think that opinion is invalid. I also think actions should reflect beliefs and beliefs should reflect actions. If they have a valid value they put before murder that's fine, but they shouldn't value murder in the first place.
 

bauke67

New member
Apr 8, 2011
300
0
0
Revnak said:
No, I believe that they shouldn't value murder. I think that opinion is invalid. I also think actions should reflect beliefs and beliefs should reflect actions. If they have a valid value they put before murder that's fine, but they shouldn't value murder in the first place.
Of course, and so do I, but objectively speaking, it's just our opinion that murder, and the valuing of it, is wrong, and so we either have no right to tell them we think murder is wrong, or they have every right to commit those murders, simply because they think they are right.
 

bauke67

New member
Apr 8, 2011
300
0
0
Mortai Gravesend said:
I'd rather scold them for being bad people before they get the idea to try anything. I can judge them negatively for their opinion.
They could say the same of everything you believe, how can you be sure either of you right at all? Who are you to judge?
 

stinkyrobot

New member
Nov 20, 2009
121
0
0
isometry said:
Remembering "sex sells", media and entertainment have no reason to talk about the large portion of the male population that gives up on sex in favor of the perpetual bachelor's lifestyle: dirty apartment, bad hygiene, video game marathons, etc.

In fact man-boys are nothing new, they have always existed, and the purpose of all this peer pressure to try and make them have sex is society's way of saying "you don't meet the minimum standards of a human being, clean yourself up." It's not really about the sex, it's about withholding sex to force them to grow up and take better care of their body and mind, and realize more of their unexplored potential.

Courtship brings out good qualities in people. Obviously for men who have to turn on the charm to try and get laid, but also for women whose traditional job is to delay the lay without causing the gentleman to lose interest, which requires that she turn on the charm as well. The commonality between "pathetic virgins" and "shameful sluts" is that both groups have given up on courtship, which leaves their charms to atrophy.
What time period are you from?

Slightly more ot http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VankK2gcQVY&sns=em
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,860
0
41
LilithSlave said:
Matthew94 said:
It's no better than the "men are the source of the worlds problems" argument.
Men != Patriarchy. This is the problem with typical antifeminism and other people getting defensive about privilege. Always asserting that when someone says something like "patriarchy" or "male supremacist thought" or "male privilege" or in terms of race, "white privilege", they're saying that white heterosexual men are evil and need to go away.

That's a farcical strawman. I'm tired of anti-feminists using these farcical, extreme comparisons to things. Society is littered with male supremacist thought. It's called male privilege. In fact most language lends itself to the idea that men are better than women.

It doesn't mean that men are bad or even to blame. It means that male privilege exist as a descriptor of society.
Ive never understood the patriarchy. Ill admit that women have more inequalities than men. However in my mind it cant possible be a patriarchy seeing as we have quite a few things that are NOT in our favor.

If society is a patriachy why do men get ff'ed in the a when it comes to custody and child support? Why do men never get to see their kids? Why do charity earnings for breast cancer make charity earnings for prostate cancer look like a pittance. Or that male circumcision is a given in many countries and female is prohibited almost everywhere. Or that domestic violence against men is almost as high as domestic violence against women? Women get 40% less jail time on average for identical crimes statistically.

Im not saying this to play the victim. Im saying that if society is REALLY owned by men. Like a patriarchy. Why would it inlude elements that screwed over the ruling gender? Who IS the head of this patriachy that has all these negative elements for us.

Its pretty much entirely society and culture based and its not something you can generalise. My friends are not jesus freaks. My friends are not uptight or socially recluse. However my friends look down equally on those who treat sex like a conquest regardless of gender, we do it more to guys in our group that girls. Its a weird thing ive never experienced.

 

Doclector

New member
Aug 22, 2009
5,010
0
0
Okay, let's get the feminism debate out the way. While the OP reeks of "Oh, alright, I'll throw you cavemen a bone", this is not the worst hardcore feminist we've seen by far, and I have no idea why it's come to occupy most of the thread.

Furthermore, feminism is a ridiculous idea as is masculinism. Mascuilinty. Whatever the male equivelant is called. Basically, either view is a way of saying that one gender is better than the other or deserves better treatment than the other, which is, putting it bluntly, NOT OKAY. It's not okay morally, it's not okay lawfully, it's not okay by basic human rights. I find it hilarious how both sides go on about equality whilst preaching ideas that are directly contradictory to equality.

Anyway, on with the topic at hand. To be honest, people don't tend to insult me for being a virgin. Not anymore at least. Virgin shaming seems to be mainly for adolescents and the immature. Still, however, due to society constantly suggesting that absolutely everyone is having sex and that if you aren't, you're a terrible person, I can't help but feel at least a little ashamed without anyone shaming me.

Our society's current views of sex and sexual issues are plain wrong or even at times, out right crazy. The problem is far further reaching than some gender specific thing.
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0
BiscuitTrouser said:
Linking to a guy who tells rape victims to drown in semen while trying to make a reasoned argument against feminism's ideals is not a good move.
(Its pretty late but if I don't reply, just google it. That shit happened).

Just saying.

(Also feminism believes patriarchy hurts men too. It doesnt mean all men are always better off than all women. Thats a common misconception).

EDIT: I keep telling myself I won't get involved with these arguments. I dont want to get involved. It's destroying my faith in our good community as gamers.
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,860
0
41
Phasmal said:
BiscuitTrouser said:
Linking to a guy who tells rape victims to drown in semen while trying to make a reasoned argument against feminism's ideals is not a good move.
(Its pretty late but if I don't reply, just google it. That shit happened).

Just saying.

(Also feminism believes patriarchy hurts men too. It doesnt mean all men are always better off than all women. Thats a common misconception).
Then why is it called a patriachy if it hurts men... how does this make sense? If the system hurts everyone how can we called it "ruled" by everyone as the word patriarchy implies. Who is upholding this system?!

And regardless of what else he has said (please show me where he says this, long story short i dont believe you) i agree with everything he said in this video. Be for the rights of all. Always. No descrimination is ok ever under any circumstances and ALL gender roles are wrong. Feminism is a very us vs them name that makes it sound very "girls only". But if the patriarchy is hurting me and we are on the same side why would you do this? I agree with you but feminism doesnt include me in its description. Id rather be under a banner that didnt include a specific group of people in its name that isnt me.

Hey i didnt do anything to show i was a bad gamer did i :C how did i make you lose faith in things, i support equality for everything...
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0
BiscuitTrouser said:
Then why is it called a patriachy if it hurts men... how does this make sense? If the system hurts everyone how can we called it "ruled" by everyone as the word patriarchy implies. And regardless of what else he has said (please show me where he says this, long story short i dont believe you) i agree with everything he said in this video. Be for the rights of all. Always. No descrimination is ok ever under any circumstances and ALL gender roles are wrong.
It's meant so that the people at the top (business, government) are mainly men, rich men.
An incident of patriarchy hurting men; that bullshit `men dont cry` thing. Just makes men store up their emotions.
Also, cheers for not believing me but here you go http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/02/08/the-not-so-amazing-atheist-self-immolates/
http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithhammers/2012/02/08/the-amazing-rape-promoting-atheist/
 

BiscuitTrouser

Elite Member
May 19, 2008
2,860
0
41
Phasmal said:
BiscuitTrouser said:
Then why is it called a patriachy if it hurts men... how does this make sense? If the system hurts everyone how can we called it "ruled" by everyone as the word patriarchy implies. And regardless of what else he has said (please show me where he says this, long story short i dont believe you) i agree with everything he said in this video. Be for the rights of all. Always. No descrimination is ok ever under any circumstances and ALL gender roles are wrong.
It's meant so that the people at the top (business, government) are mainly men, rich men.
An incident of patriarchy hurting men; that bullshit `men dont cry` thing. Just makes men store up their emotions.
Also, cheers for not believing me but here you go http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2012/02/08/the-not-so-amazing-atheist-self-immolates/
http://freethoughtblogs.com/camelswithhammers/2012/02/08/the-amazing-rape-promoting-atheist/
Sorry i found it hard to believe a person who is usually rational and well thought out would say something so horrific... without evidence i found it hard to credit, im sure you would to had i assigned the quote to someone you like.

Wow... just wow... did this really happen? Was this really him? Seriously?! Im... i dont... wow... erm... wow... sorry i didnt believe you. Are you sure this was the same dude? This is fucking appauling. It doesnt invalidate the things he said in that video about being for the rights of everyone rather than the rights of one side. This has changed my view on a few things. Thank you for showing me this.

Would you like to address my point about the name of "feminism" alienating the men who are negatively affected by it and thus reducing the amount of people likely to fight for your side? It seems very counter intuitive and ive never understood it. I wouldnt call myself a feminist anymore than id call myself a hamster-rights-activist. Id call myself an ANIMAL rights activist since hamsters are inclusive in that label in the same way id call myself a HUMAN rights activist since feminist implies only women. Its implicit. Even if it isnt the aim. I think feminists would garner more male support if the name was changed to sound less aggressive and anti male.
 

Phasmal

Sailor Jupiter Woman
Jun 10, 2011
3,676
0
0
Matthew94 said:
You are just using an ad hominem attack against TAA. Why not counter his points instead of bringing up the comments he made.
I literally cannot force myself to watch that video. I'm aware I don't want to listen to him because of the kind of comments that he made and the kind of person he is, and you can say that makes me a bad person. I was not saying anything about the points he makes, simply that he may not be the best representation to have in this kind of argument.

BiscuitTrouser said:
Would you like to address my point about the name of "feminism" alienating the men who are negatively affected by it and thus reducing the amount of people likely to fight for your side? It seems very counter intuitive.
I'll try.
I can't speak for all women/feminists.
But why does `fem` mean you can't associate with it? I get called dude all the time. I play games in a male dominated environment that are specifically designed for men.

I've known many male feminists who were comfortable with the term. If you don't wanna call yourself that `equal rights activist` will do if you don't wanna associate with it. Doesn't matter what you call yourself, just matters what you do.

Freechoice said:
He's all right with me.
Link is above.
 

Freechoice

New member
Dec 6, 2010
1,019
0
0
Phasmal said:
BiscuitTrouser said:
Linking to a guy who tells rape victims to drown in semen while trying to make a reasoned argument against feminism's ideals is not a good move.
(Its pretty late but if I don't reply, just google it. That shit happened).

Just saying.

(Also feminism believes patriarchy hurts men too. It doesnt mean all men are always better off than all women. Thats a common misconception).
Burden of proof is on you.

And did he say it with mocking sarcasm? He does that shit a lot. Not necessarily smart, but I've only disagreed with him on like 3 things. He also smashed a Mass Effect 3 disk.

He's all right with me.