Feminism. Stage blue and red istead of greem?

[Zweistein]

Well, if I could choose, I would call it equitism instead of feminism or gender equality.

@Emerald Wow, interesting observations regarding the different stages! I will check out these books!

 

Edited July 3, 2018 by Zweistein

[SFRL]

 

[Leo Gura]

People who gripe about feminism usually haven't ever bothered to study it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

Ask yourself this: "How many books have I read on this topic?"

The whole point of griping is that its a distraction from study, contemplation, and understanding.

[Emerald]

10 hours ago, Zweistein said:

Well, if I could choose, I would call it equitism instead of feminism or gender equality.

@Emerald Wow, interesting observations regarding the different stages! I will check out these books!

 

Feminism strikes more at the core of the movement than the word "Equitism". As much as Feminism is about gender equality, the deeper implications of the word are that it's meant to aide in the re-integration of the Divine Feminine. So, really it's a movement geared toward undoing the Feminine repression that has fragmented human society for thousands of years. So, esoterically speaking, Feminism is an incredibly appropriate word for its end-game. 

[Edvard]

What if it turns out feminism doesn't work just according to the ideology/book of feminism? That's why I think it's silly to give it such a colored word.  Just why? And why no blackism, disableism, gayism? BTW. 

It is also silly in the sense that it's just divisive. It just scares Orange and Blue people away. But then again, this is Green and not Yellow.

Also, what man/masculine person calls himself a feminist? 

What about just subscribing to whatever-works-ism? 

I have nothing against women being equal though. I think that would be best, but what that means I don't know. I just care about equal opportunities. But you can't be too fundamentalistic here either. There are biological differences that we know of and don't know of. No reason to commit to anything here.

Edited July 4, 2018 by Edvard

[Zweistein]

3 hours ago, Emerald said:

Feminism strikes more at the core of the movement than the word "Equitism". As much as Feminism is about gender equality, the deeper implications of the word are that it's meant to aide in the re-integration of the Divine Feminine. So, really it's a movement geared toward undoing the Feminine repression that has fragmented human society for thousands of years. So, esoterically speaking, Feminism is an incredibly appropriate word for its end-game. 

I'm a woman hiding behind a male name - exactly because I feel like I'm not taken seriously otherwise. So, yes of course - I hear you, Emerald! 

On the other hand, imagine if this movement was about equity - then men wouldn't rebell so much, because they would feel included - right? 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Zweistein

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Zweistein said:

I'm a woman hiding behind a male name - exactly because I feel like I'm not taken seriously otherwise. So, yes of course - I hear you, Emerald! 

On the other hand, imagine if this movement was about equity - then men wouldn't rebell so much, because they would feel included - right? 

Any movement that disrupts the status quo in any meaningful way will rustle a lot of people's Jimmies. Trust me, as much resistance as there is toward Third Wave Feminism in the current era, that level of resistance probably can't even hold a candle to the resistance to First and Second Wave Feminism. So, every effective movement always has a huge hater-base. People just don't like change, and they get scared.

So, it doesn't actually matter what you call it. The people who are against it now because it's called Feminism would be against it if it were called Equitism too. This is because if Equitism were truly about acheiving equity in an effective way and not just about pretending that we've already achieved equity, women's issues would still be focused upon disproportionately because women are disproportionately negatively affected by the dis-integration of the Divine Feminine. So, those that think in terms of Feminism focusing on women's issues unfairly, would still perceive this disproportionate attention to women's issues in Equitism as unfair and would be against it.  But this common mistake, is just lack of nuance and not thinking systemically about societal issues. 

But truly, the vast majority of Feminist schools of thought are about achieving equity. Also, notice that it isn't called Womanism for a reason. Men have a feminine side, and so Feminism is for them too. And contemporary Feminists talk a lot about how the expectation of unrealistic hyper-masculinity in men, causes negative effects for the individual man and society at large. They also talk about how this can especially have an impact on gay and bi-sexual men and men who are simply not naturally masculine. So, there is actually a reasonable amount of focus toward male issues, even if it's not focused on to the same degree.

So, understand that the intention of Feminism is to achieve equity. It's just that the path to equity is not solely about treating people equally in daily life  and pretending like everything is already equal. That's just not an effective solution to our deep systemic problems. It's about actively removing systemic barriers to equity in whichever way is effective, which sometimes takes counterintuitive paths that can be read by less nuanced thinkers as unfair due to unequal focus. And it isn't passive. It's a very active process. And to remove barriers, we have to notice where barriers exist and be able to recognize which barriers are causing the biggest societal issues. Then when issues come into conflict with one another prioritize the bigger issues and not get derailed by smaller ones. 

And it's not that men are excluded from this. Many issues that uniquely effect men, stem from the issues that Feminists are trying to dismantle.

For example, many men are upset that family courts tend to rule in the favor of the women getting custody of children. This is genuinely a huge problem. And I've heard many guys attribute this problem to Feminists, as though it's something that Feminists caused or something that Feminists support. But this problem wasn't caused by Feminists. It's actually a bias that stems from societal ideas which Feminism is diametrically opposed to: taking gender roles as absolutes. So, the same people who believe in their heart of hearts that women are inferior in the workplace, are the same ones who believe that men are inferior care-takers for children and are the expendable parent. Feminists tend to be VERY against these gender stereotypes. 

So, the men who blame Feminists for this issue often don't realize that they're fighting against an ally. Then, a sizable minority of those same men who lament the unfairness of family courts, inexplicably turn around and support beliefs in  rigid gender roles, which then ends up percolating through the entire society. And then, once that idea percolates into society as a basic truth about humanity and is thoroughly incepted into the minds of the lawmakers and family court judges, it results in the disproportionate granting of custody rights to mothers over fathers. So, I see this situation as being like a dog chasing its own tail and trying to bite it, then getting angry at at someone else when it gets bitten. It's a very bitter irony. 

There is another version of the picture you posted of the people standing on boxes. In the picture, it's the same people with the same differences but none of them are on boxes. But they can all see perfectly. It's because they've gotten rid of the systemic barrier that was causing the inequality in the first place because the fence is gone from the picture. 

Edit: Also, you totally should let people know that you're a woman. I already knew. But many of the guys on here are pretty receptive. I know that implicit biases exist all the same though. And it is frustrating being subconsciously written off by many people in life: male and female. But there's no stakes on here. So, my policy is to always just be as honest and thorough as I can be without hedging myself, and I've seldom had the issue of being purposefully disrespected or noticably written off based on my sex. 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Emerald

[Zweistein]

Let me post the version without the fence:

[Zweistein]

@Leo Gura And now we "need" (lol, hehe - here is the needyness again ?) the last version of this image (without the fence) with a male, a female and a person in the wheelchair. I haven't found it anywhere yet... 

And yes, if I happen to find the time, I can fix it, lol.

[Zweistein]

Haha: 

 

[TomDashingPornstar]

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by TomDashingPornstar

[Freakrik]

I am not saying that feminism is red, blue and orange by nature. There is versions of it. But from what i have seen some feminists today are extremely agressive,  loud and violent. (hardcore SJW) and then we have those witchhunting femnist who demonising and hates eveyone that dos not call themself a feminist (men or women). Then they have this wierd ideas like there is no diffrence in male or female brains. 72 genders etc. and when a writer who calmly argues that both genders have their own probelms in his books get hatestorms you know something is wrong https://www.metro.se/artikel/pär-ström-därför-lämnar-jag-genusdebatten-xr (translate to english)

 

Edited July 4, 2018 by Freakrik

[d0ornokey]

@Freakrik my perception of this is that you see the super vocal and crazy ones on youtube

i'm thinking the vast majority aren't actually like that 

[Freakrik]

5 minutes ago, d0ornokey said:

@Freakrik my perception of this is that you see the super vocal and crazy ones on youtube

i'm thinking the vast majority aren't actually like that 

Yes of course They are a small minority. But i had to list them in order to point out stage red femnism. Stage blue seems to be more common

Edited July 5, 2018 by Freakrik

[Leo Gura]

Guess who hates equality?

Mr. Ego

Equality will always be resisted by those whom equality seeks to level. The ego doesn't want equality, it wants control.

The ego is a little tyrant. And no tyrant wants to be deposed. But in the end, the tyrant always loses. It just takes a long time and a lot of people get hurt in the process.

[Gabriel Antonio]

?

[Freakrik]

40 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Guess who hates equality?

Mr. Ego

Equality will always be resisted by those whom equality seeks to level. The ego doesn't want equality, it wants control.

The ego is a little tyrant. And no tyrant wants to be deposed. But in the end, the tyrant always loses. It just takes a long time and a lot of people get hurt in the process.

yes of course. But i think it's stupid that you have to call yourself something. And i am talking about what the feminist movement are doing in action. Not on papper 

[MisterMan]

19 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

People who gripe about feminism usually haven't ever bothered to study it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

Ask yourself this: "How many books have I read on this topic?"

The whole point of griping is that its a distraction from study, contemplation, and understanding.

I certainly have not read any books and this is just a pure observation but it appears to me that many women use feminism as an excuse to be antagonistic and chauvinistic towards men. Just like Jordan Peterson says that some hide behind the virtue of being a feminist in order to be able to openly exert their anger and resentment that is built within them.

I do not believe these people represent what feminism actually is, but i do believe there other people who use these virtuous groups for more destructive reasons than beneficial and that we are seeing more of this now.

It is quite funny when you look at the situation. Becuase both sides are accusing each other of projection. SJW's will accuse any white man who offers a counter argument as just trying to defend their positions in the patriarchy because their power is diminishing. And People like Peterson say that this is a typical psychological phenomenon "victim blaming mentality" meaning the very people who have been abused, as a means of feeling in control use the very same methods that they were victim to on others. So they are in effect echo chambers

I believe any sort of understanding has to be met in the cause of why people feel like this. It really is funny, that gays trans etc were victims of shaming and heavily condemned in the past and that now they exhbit behaviour that actively seeks to shame and condemn other people.

Edited July 5, 2018 by MisterMan

[Emerald]

1 hour ago, Freakrik said:

I am not saying that feminism is red, blue and orange by nature. There is versions of it. But from what i have seen some feminists today are extremely agressive,  loud and violent. (hardcore SJW) and then we have those witchhunting femnist who demonising and hates eveyone that dos not call themself a feminist (men or women). Then they have this wierd ideas like there is no diffrence in male or female brains. 72 genders etc. and when a writer who calmly argues that both genders have their own probelms in his books get hatestorms you know something is wrong https://www.metro.se/artikel/pär-ström-därför-lämnar-jag-genusdebatten-xr (translate to english)

 

I think you're making the mistake of assuming dogma and harsh reaction is alway Red or Blue. But all levels of spiral dynamics are dogmatic about something, up until stage Yellow.

Purple is dogmatic about magical thinking. Red is dogmatic in the sense that the individual believes themselves to be the center of the universe. Blue is dogmatic about maintaining traditions and social institutions. Orange is dogmatic about capitalism and the importance of an individual's worth being based upon merit. And Green is dogmatic about fairness and equality.

And at each of these stages there are varying levels of vitriol and violence that individuals at that level will be willing to expend to ensure that the dogma of the stage is upheld. So, excessive Reds will kill someone who challenges their notion of dominance and being the center of the universe. Excessive Blues will go to war to enforce, spread, and defend the social institutions. Excessive Oranges will sacrifice civility and fairness to raise to the top of the hierarchy. And excessive Greens will call out and shame anyone who stands in the way of fairness and equality. 

But at its core, ideas in Green like Feminism are inherently more conscious dogmas than the dogmas that came before it. And you can see that with each stage, that the values become more and more conscious. 

[SFRL]

8 hours ago, TomDashingPornstar said:

Feminism is about working towards feminine/female interests.  I know it's not the most fun way to put it. But it's the least complicated.  On aggregate, it does not care about or understand masculine interests.