Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar!
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics Mobile Theme Dark Theme
Discuss Anti-Feminism, Men's Rights and Misandry.
3 posts • Page 1 of 1
All people â€“whether they be rich, well off, or poorâ€“ live and breath double standards. The concept is the base model for teaching and parenting. â€œDo as I say and not as I doâ€� is what mom and dad used to tell us. Now that we have grown up, matured, or have become that certain age where we are considered legally responsible for our own actions, we practice the same double standards our parents practiced with us. Even while we practice them with our sons and daughters, nieces and nephews, some of us still feel the anger we felt boiling inside of our chests when we were told not to do something that so many, even the people telling us not to did.
While it is acceptable to deny our offspring certain rights and privileges for their own well being, it is also unfortunately widely accepted that adults should gain certain privileges based on a similar principal of double standards; do as I do, without the same effort.
I once believed it was common knowledge to everyone, even feminists, that there were a wide array of obvious double standards within physically demanding professions. Sadly, as I am beginning to realize about a lot of important issues that involve feminists, this is not the case. Most who have joined the ranks of the many anti-feminists advocating for the laws that discriminate against people based on gender to be abolished are already well aware of the fact that feminists will flat out lie to accomplish their goals. Those goals being the dehumanization of men in the eyes of the public and the ousting of men from any position of power be it political or not. Although all feminists, even moderates will lie in some way shape or form when it comes to their continuing quest to silence any voice raised about the importance of male issues, discussing and researching the topic of this article has broadened my knowledge on the different levels of feminists that until recently I myself did not know existed.
The most obvious and well known feminist that all anti-feminists have run into somewhere in their lives is the ignorant and comical forefront of the feminist movement. The zealot or pawn.
You will find the zealot anywhere male issues are spoken of or written about. They will barge in, invited or not, and deny anything anyone says that does not fall in line with feminist doctrine or theory. They will do so in an insulting and disgraceful manner and not stop until all but themselves are silenced. Whether they are educated or not is irrelevant as their tactics will conceal any form of education from all who are forced to listen. Facts mean nothing to them. Instead any facts that are irrefutably proven will become misogynistic or a conspiracy derived from the so called patriarchy. However, anything the zealot claims will be undeniable truth. Evidence is not required for these people. Everything they say is fact, because they say so. No reference and no studies nothing is produced from the zealot except maybe a personal experience they are able to dredge up from years past that always falls in line with any debate they happen to be in and, of course, movies.
G.I. Jane has been the reference of many zealots I spoke with about the issue of double standards in physically demanding professions. Needless to say defeating these tools of the feminist movement is rather simple but some people such as myself enjoy dragging the argument out for a while to let all who know nothing of feminism and those loosely affiliated observe what blindly following an absurd ideology simply because it fits your world view can do to someone. Once the facts are laid out in front of the zealot he or she will attempt to change the topic of the discussion but unlike the moderate not all feminists are like that upper level drones, the zealot is usually too emotionally charged after being proven wrong to care about reserving any form of dignity and will spout off words and concepts he/she does not understand in an attempt to appear calm and intelligent but failure is the only path these tools can follow when up against anyone with even a rain drop of knowledge on these issues.
Zealots are now usually frowned upon by the more intelligent feminists but this was not always so. Being a young man I was not alive during the infamous 70s and all the radicalism that ran rampant in the west during that time but from what I have seen and read, the feminist zealot was once the main weapon of the movement. A few smart radicals could rouse hundreds of angry unintelligent followers to march through the streets damning men and women who did not conform to their view of how the world should be. The radicals would single out articles of clothing, posters, movies, political figures, text books, and school policies claiming they were the source of womensâ€™ oppression and the zealots would charge through the streets destroying what they could and shouting at what they could not. Yes the zealot was a powerful tool back when the streets were the forefronts of battles. Now the zealots have their place but have taken a back seat to the theorists that have flooded the education system.
When facts are brought up about physical standards being lowered for women in areas such as the police, the military, and fire departments the zealots are the first to give the famous feminist line PROVE IT! However, as we already know, providing evidence is pointless with the pawns so we must move on to the Knights. I, being a veteran, admit that I did not know of the lowered standards women have in the army until someone else showed it to me on a PT (physical fitness test) chart for a quick laugh before the test. At first when I saw the substantially large disparity between the number of push ups men and women had to do (Women: 19 in 2 minutes Men: 43 in 2 minutes) I admittedly chuckled at the thought. Well duh, men are stronger than women- is what I thought. Then I glanced at the run times men and women had to complete and was astonished. The only equal exercise men and women have to complete are sit ups. However, measuring the exercises that women aged 17-21 have to complete with those of men aged 17-21 is disgraceful especially when considering the large number of men and women in combat zones right now.
What hit home for me was when I glanced further down the chart to see what I would have to accomplish if I chose to remain in the military. When my eyes took in the numbers for men aged 57-61 my laughter ceased. To pass a physical fitness test, 17 year old women only have to train to the standards of a 61 year old man. Basically if something is seen as favoring men over women then it is sexist and unfair and must be changed yet when the opposite is presented it is not sexist or unfair, it is just women proving they can do whatever a man can. Do as I do, without the same effort.
Enter the knights of the feminist movement. Not to be mistaken with the white knights or manginas, as MRAs identify them, but the intelligent bigots who realize that repeatedly shouting lies will no longer suffice in effecting change. Instead of rushing into any situation with idiocy, these feminists will take a moment to actually listen to or read what someone challenging their views is saying. What happens next depends on the caliber of the anti-feminist. If one simply damns a double standard that favors women the knight will first deny the existence of the double standard or downplay the relevance of the anger the anti-feminist feels towards the double standard.
If only claims are provided by the anti-feminist as a defense, the knight will of course ask for proof. The knightâ€™s actions will parallel those of the zealot until facts are entered into the equation. At first, as always with any feminist, the knight will try to construe any disdain for these double standards as an attack on women and immediately attempt to shift the debate into a male VS female argument. This tactic, while pathetic, is unfortunately effective when one only focuses on the unfairness the double standards represent toward men.
As with the army PT test there are hundreds of thousands of women allowed into the military on the lowered standards the test presents. This fact is insulting to the women who can and do pass the test on par with the standards of men and dangerous for men and women in combat zones. Indeed the one and only fact that any anti-feminist needs to bring out the knight in a debate with an intelligent feminist is the fact that women can and do achieve the same standards men do to qualify for a profession. This fact makes the lowering of standards in these professions pointless and insulting to the women who take the time to actually work and earn the right to hold jobs within these fields.
From here the knight will deploy the only argument he or she can; men and women are different. For this particular argument, the feminist will abandon one of the prime theories presented by the feminist movement; the only differences between men and women are their reproductive organs, everything else is a result of a patriarchal gender socialization. Now, rather suddenly, the feminist believes that there are natural differences between men and women albeit only for this debate. The feminist will tell you that women have a lower center of gravity or something along those lines and that the test standards are lowered for the purpose of bringing people up to their best physical performance.
Yes, there is always an excuse feminists will have to let double standards that favor women slide but will create double standards where there are none and claim they favor men just so they have something to protest, but I digress. The point the knight will feebly try and make with this argument is that since men and women have different bodies their physical standards should be different. Indeed, the whole a woman can do anything a man can argument is thrown out of the window as well here. However, none of these points are relevant as it is proven that women can at least pass a PT test according to a male scoring chart. Some behemoth sized females can even max their scores on par with men. Whatâ€™s next, after you brush aside the knightâ€™s points with facts? The boys VS girls sandbox argument ensues, of course. They will tell you itâ€™s obvious men are stronger than women but women are smarter (yes some people still make this foolish claim) or the famous we birth all of you argument and several others. The goal from here on is to get the anti-feminist that is always assumed to be a man by any feminist to shoot back with men this and men that.
Do not be dragged into this farce, it is a pointless battle and does not help to show the world how irrelevant feminism has always been. Simply stay on topic and in some cases you will reduce the knight to the zealot state, which is a state that any and all feminists will revert back to when proven wrong. Instead of a calm person speaking your mind you will become a troll spouting misogyny in support of the patriarchy. This usually, is when one of the many Queens will move down from the chess board in an attempt to defend what little respect people viewing the zealots and knights may have for feminism.
Queens come in all forms and can easily be mistaken for zealots at a glance. They consider most arguments against feminism to be a waste of their time and will only attack when they are certain a victory can be attained. History is their forte and they frequently use it in an attempt to silence anyone speaking out about male issues quickly and with little dissent. What better weapon could anyone use when debating any major political issue other than history? There are so many different accounts and records of past events that no one can claim anything as fact with absolute certainty without years of study. A quick google search on a topic of interest may drudge up thousands of different results. A library while smaller in scale will yield the same results.
This disadvantage is the queenâ€™s main advantage. Concerning the double standards mentioned in this article the queen will tell you that women werenâ€™t allowed in the military to begin with, which is true but irrelevant. The queen will also almost always find a way to turn the focus of the debate away from the main point, be it about feminism or not, and attempt to blame the problem on men. He or she will say men are the ones who made the standards lower so blame them.
This of course, is not the case. A group of â€œexpertsâ€� in sports medicine decided that the APFT was not fair to women. Ignoring the fact that women have been in the military since WWI and have been passing what was once the standard for everyone but is now regarded as the male standard, these experts, seeing that such a low number of women were in the army, decided that the reason for this was not that most women did not train and commit themselves to pass the standards of the military, no it was because the standards were just too high for women to be able to handle. A womanâ€™s body is different than a manâ€™s body. So a physical fitness board was formed and the standards were lowered.
To my understanding this was done during the 70′s when the feminist movement was at its peak influence when it came to pushing unqualified women into many professions with affirmative action. To them, if women were not in a male dominated profession, then sexism was the root cause. The fire departments were not untouched by this phenomenon either. Be careful when mentioning firefighters to feminist queens, however, because they will immediately try and corner you with the fact that the physical tests for firefighters are gender neutral. This is true, but do not lose the main point of the argument.
Just because men and women adhere to the same standards does not mean they were not lowered for women. As it turns out, they were. The Fredrick County fire department in Maryland is one example. When first implemented, the physical tests for this particular fire department faced extreme scrutiny over age discrimination. Several different examinations of how the tests should be comprised and performed to allow new hires to be tested on their ability to complete physically strenuous tasks in relation to their job were conducted. Finally the age issue was somewhat silenced, however, another issue soon arose. While all healthy men do have the potential to be extremely physically fit not all achieve this goal and many failed to accomplish the tasks put forth in the test. However, 81 to 85 percent of men were able to pass while only 22 percent (2 out of the 9 women who attempted) were able to pass.
This of course got groups that represent womenâ€™s interests in an uproar. One such group WFS (women in the fire service) would attack and examine any test put forth by the fire department stressing linkage, which refers to linking the entry-level performance standard with the incumbentâ€™s level of performance. Since Frederick County requires, and has required for years, a physical agility test for all new hires, it is imperative that incumbents meet this level of performance, which can be measured by the same type of testing. Otherwise, Frederick County must discontinue administering a physical agility test to all new hires.
Sounds good right? Make a test that everyone can pass. But that didnâ€™t work either.
One concern with Frederick Countyâ€™s physical agility test is the disproportionate number of female candidates who have failed the test. Whatever the type of test used, where there is disparate impact, the test may be challenged in court, and the fire department using the test bears the responsibility of defending it.
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/01/22/dou ... upporters/
In short, if not enough women pass then sexism is the cause and womenâ€™s groups will sue.
However, Davis cautions that â€œâ€¦to lower standards undermine(s) the accomplishments of those women who have achieved success on their own merits.â€�
It would indeed, but that doesnâ€™t matter to the queen feminists who believe that disparity between men and women because of natural differences is some sort of patriarchal oppression or socialization. The cleverness of the feminist queen is not only displayed in her or his ability to turn a debate around on an anti-feminist but also in their ability to rally the knights and zealots to their defense. As is the role of a queen in chess, the feminist queen will follow this role to a T. They will make the claim that men only lowered the standards to trick the public into thinking that women are too weak to do what men can do. Baseless accusations and shameful tactics such as this is the feminist way and unfortunately a method that garners overwhelming support.
To beat it is again simple. One only need provide facts. After their defeat, the zealot, the knight, and the queen will end with whatever arrogant insult they can muster and find somewhere else to spread their bigotry and support of double standards. Their arguments and beliefs will reset back to their most basic functions; men are oppressing women, there are no biological differences between men and women except reproductive differences, and of course the patriarchy is all around us.
The double standards within physically demanding professions are insulting to women who have and still do dedicate themselves to passing standards that were once set forth for all but are now trivialized to appease the unfounded claims of sexism and discrimination made by feminists. I find it sad that those who say they are for equality for all and the rights of women are often in support of the exact opposite. They would rather do as I do, without the same effort.
Wow, this was great! Feminists are hypocrites, they want equal rights but they don't want equal responsibility! It's unbelievable what women get away with these days! Standards are lowered for women in the military, in the police force, women firefighters, etc. That alone is enough to tell you women cannot do those jobs as well as men can!