Ireland says "Yes" to same-sex marriage

[DaveDodo007]

Dave, sorry mate, but you don't get to define feminism. Plenty of people self-identify as feminists without buying into any of the things you keep ranting about. While there are some truly fucked-up ideologues out there, wearing the feminist mantle, they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Nothing in the world is as black and white as that.

I don't have a problem with the definition of feminism. I judge a movement by the actions and behaviour of its members and by that standard feminists condemn themselves. I just shine a light on their cultish behaviour.

http://feministcurrent.com/12006/why-im ... -equality/

[pErvinalia]

Except the ones that don't fit into your blinkered world view.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Dave, sorry mate, but you don't get to define feminism. Plenty of people self-identify as feminists without buying into any of the things you keep ranting about. While there are some truly fucked-up ideologues out there, wearing the feminist mantle, they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Nothing in the world is as black and white as that.

I don't have a problem with the definition of feminism. I judge a movement by the actions and behaviour of its members and by that standard feminists condemn themselves. I just shine a light on their cultish behaviour.

http://feministcurrent.com/12006/why-im ... -equality/

You're judging the "movement" by the actions of "standard feminists", are you? You're not doing that at all. You're cherry-picking the most extreme examples of dogmatic, frothing-at-the-mouth harridans claiming that they are "standard feminists". That is not the same thing at all.

[DaveDodo007]

Except the ones that don't fit into your blinkered world view.

I can post links to high profile media feminists being nasty cunts all day, I can't find any high profile media feminists condemning them anywhere. Even if you believed that feminism was once a noble cause you cannot deny the mounting evidence of the movement is now run/being driven by man hating cunts. Though all the evidence in the world won't convince a cult member and I'm the blinkered one.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

There's that "movement" word again. You seem to think that feminism has some kind of internal, hierarchical structure with leaders and officers. But you're not the blinkered one, oh no...

[pErvinalia]

Except the ones that don't fit into your blinkered world view.

I can post links to high profile media feminists being nasty cunts all day, I can't find any high profile media feminists condemning them anywhere. Even if you believed that feminism was once a noble cause you cannot deny the mounting evidence of the movement is now run/being driven by man hating cunts. Though all the evidence in the world won't convince a cult member and I'm the blinkered one.

You clearly are. The rest of us admit that there's different types of feminists - i.e. moderates and extremists. Just the same as religionists and any other ideology you'd like to name. But it's you who thinks that the only type of feminists are the extreme type. Expressly because they threaten your world. You're a scared little boy.

[DaveDodo007]

Dave, sorry mate, but you don't get to define feminism. Plenty of people self-identify as feminists without buying into any of the things you keep ranting about. While there are some truly fucked-up ideologues out there, wearing the feminist mantle, they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Nothing in the world is as black and white as that.

I don't have a problem with the definition of feminism. I judge a movement by the actions and behaviour of its members and by that standard feminists condemn themselves. I just shine a light on their cultish behaviour.

http://feministcurrent.com/12006/why-im ... -equality/

You're judging the "movement" by the actions of "standard feminists", are you? You're not doing that at all. You're cherry-picking the most extreme examples of dogmatic, frothing-at-the-mouth harridans claiming that they are "standard feminists". That is not the same thing at all.

You don't get to claim I'm cherry-picking without providing the 'prevalent evidence' that contradicts my claims.

[DaveDodo007]

Except the ones that don't fit into your blinkered world view.

I can post links to high profile media feminists being nasty cunts all day, I can't find any high profile media feminists condemning them anywhere. Even if you believed that feminism was once a noble cause you cannot deny the mounting evidence of the movement is now run/being driven by man hating cunts. Though all the evidence in the world won't convince a cult member and I'm the blinkered one.

You clearly are. The rest of us admit that there's different types of feminists - i.e. moderates and extremists. Just the same as religionists and any other ideology you'd like to name. But it's you who thinks that the only type of feminists are the extreme type. Expressly because they threaten your world. You're a scared little boy.

Ahhh! Insults, always the best way to prove you are right.

[pErvinalia]

I don't have to prove anything against a guy who presents empty rhetoric. I just have to point out how empty your rhetoric is..

[pErvinalia]

Dave, sorry mate, but you don't get to define feminism. Plenty of people self-identify as feminists without buying into any of the things you keep ranting about. While there are some truly fucked-up ideologues out there, wearing the feminist mantle, they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Nothing in the world is as black and white as that.

I don't have a problem with the definition of feminism. I judge a movement by the actions and behaviour of its members and by that standard feminists condemn themselves. I just shine a light on their cultish behaviour.

http://feministcurrent.com/12006/why-im ... -equality/

You're judging the "movement" by the actions of "standard feminists", are you? You're not doing that at all. You're cherry-picking the most extreme examples of dogmatic, frothing-at-the-mouth harridans claiming that they are "standard feminists". That is not the same thing at all.

You don't get to claim I'm cherry-picking without providing the 'prevalent evidence' that contradicts my claims.

A number of us have presented it. You've ignored it. As usual.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Dave, sorry mate, but you don't get to define feminism. Plenty of people self-identify as feminists without buying into any of the things you keep ranting about. While there are some truly fucked-up ideologues out there, wearing the feminist mantle, they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Nothing in the world is as black and white as that.

I don't have a problem with the definition of feminism. I judge a movement by the actions and behaviour of its members and by that standard feminists condemn themselves. I just shine a light on their cultish behaviour.

http://feministcurrent.com/12006/why-im ... -equality/

You're judging the "movement" by the actions of "standard feminists", are you? You're not doing that at all. You're cherry-picking the most extreme examples of dogmatic, frothing-at-the-mouth harridans claiming that they are "standard feminists". That is not the same thing at all.

You don't get to claim I'm cherry-picking without providing the 'prevalent evidence' that contradicts my claims.

Nice attempt to shift the burden of proof. You claimed that the examples you picked were representative of "standard feminists". I questioned that. It was therefore up to you to provide evidence of your claim. All you have been able to show to back up your position are more anecdotes. Meh.

[DaveDodo007]

Dave, sorry mate, but you don't get to define feminism. Plenty of people self-identify as feminists without buying into any of the things you keep ranting about. While there are some truly fucked-up ideologues out there, wearing the feminist mantle, they are very much the exception rather than the rule. Nothing in the world is as black and white as that.

I don't have a problem with the definition of feminism. I judge a movement by the actions and behaviour of its members and by that standard feminists condemn themselves. I just shine a light on their cultish behaviour.

http://feministcurrent.com/12006/why-im ... -equality/

You're judging the "movement" by the actions of "standard feminists", are you? You're not doing that at all. You're cherry-picking the most extreme examples of dogmatic, frothing-at-the-mouth harridans claiming that they are "standard feminists". That is not the same thing at all.

You don't get to claim I'm cherry-picking without providing the 'prevalent evidence' that contradicts my claims.

Nice attempt to shift the burden of proof. You claimed that the examples you picked were representative of "standard feminists". I questioned that. It was therefore up to you to provide evidence of your claim. All you have been able to show to back up your position are more anecdotes. Meh.

Not really, my claim is that feminism is a man hating cult and I will also add, directly antithetical to equal rights. I have given and will continue to give evidence of this claim. You on the other hand claimed I was cherry picking though you have not provided any evidence to back up your claim.

[Brian Peacock]

My only concern is that they didn't ban arranged marriages on the same day. I can see how that could get ugly for some...

But congratulations to Ireland for being the first country to do this via popular vote. It's a huge leap forward.

But if the vote had gone the other way...?

[Brian Peacock]

@@vote y claim is that feminism is a man hating cult and I will also add, directly antithetical to equal rights. I have given and will continue to give evidence of this claim. You on the other hand claimed I was cherry picking though you have not provided any evidence to back up your claim.@@

That's the argument from definition fallacy. E.G: "All anti-feminists are cunts. You're an anti-feminist. Therefore..."

See what I mean?

[DaveDodo007]

@@vote y claim is that feminism is a man hating cult and I will also add, directly antithetical to equal rights. I have given and will continue to give evidence of this claim. You on the other hand claimed I was cherry picking though you have not provided any evidence to back up your claim.@@

That's the argument from definition fallacy. E.G: "All anti-feminists are cunts. You're an anti-feminist. Therefore..."

See what I mean?

Not really as anti-feminists will be individuals who are against feminism. There will be no political, advocacy, social tenets that have to be adhered to when opposing an ideology. You can define members of an ideology because to be part of that ideology they have to have an inherent trait or why label yourself as such in the first place. Anti-ideologues have no such obligations.