The General Conversation Area

My bad I was talking more about television journalist like the bbc and channel four. A good example of a militant feminist at work is channel fours Cathy Newman and her interview with Jordan Peterson

 
Well I mean we could get into listing TV journalists and their political biases, but there's honestly things I'd rather be doing. The BBC certainly employs more than a few on the right of the spectrum too - Andrew Neil and Nick Robinson, for instance. The BBC I would say are more "establishment" than right or left. Channel 4? Yeah, I'd say they're fairly left-liberal leaning. But then there's Sky News, which leans the other way. I still think you'd have a hard time proving the claim "most journalists are militant feminists" whether in print or TV.

ps. While I was Googling to see if I'd spelled Andrew Neil's name right (I didn't, I put two Ls on the end) I was suddenly confronted with the Daily Express, a newspaper I think I must have tried to block out of my mind, such is its absurd level of bias which puts even the other red tops to shame. The Express website currently features (I kid you not) a Jacob Rees-Mogg’s best Brexit quotes slideshow including such gems as "I want the BEST Brexit" and "Free movement must end after Brexit". I'd be willing to guess that militant feminists, the people who put that together are probably not. So you get some bias, I get some bias, everyone gets a bit of bias.
 
Last edited:
I think sky news is further right than the bbc but I wouldn't say there far right, as for proving most tv journalist are militant feminist that's probably easier than you'd think it would be, what with social media and people putting there opinions online for the whole world to see.
 
I think sky news is further right than the bbc but I wouldn't say there far right, as for proving most tv journalist are militant feminist that's probably easier than you'd think it would be, what with social media and people putting there opinions online for the whole world to see.

I'm genuinely curious how you define a militant feminist. I don't really do the whole politics thing, but from what I've seen online, the concept generally seems to be some kind of made up boogie man the insane far right people like to complain about.
 
I think sky news is further right than the bbc but I wouldn't say there far right
No, nor would I, but then I wouldn't say we have a major far left TV news channel either. You might disagree.

I mean if you wanna dredge up TV journalists' militant feminist tweets you can do, I'm open to new information. But I think it's likely our views on what can be counted as militant feminism also differ, so ultimately we'll probably have to agree to disagree anyway.

Also I'm going to bed because I've been awake for about 32 hours.
 
I'll dig them up but you'll have to provide me a list of all the journalist that work at the BBC,Channel 4 and Sky News. I would describe a militant feminist as feminist that calls for a radical reordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts, they also tend to favour equality of outcome over equality of opportunity and have no problems with discriminating against men so long as it benefits women, and they also have tendency of telling women what jobs they can and can't do
 
Last edited:
He called me far right my feelings are hurt:(

Not to implicate you you specifically to any political leaning, I'm only saying that the only context I've seen that in is from people like that. My main exposure to this sort of thing is via the YouTube scene, which is filled with the kind of people spouting this sort of mental rhetoric about the 'feminist agenda' trying to overthrow the world. Sargon of Akkad, The Amazing Atheist, Paul Joseph Watson, Davis Aurini, ect...
 
Not to implicate you you specifically to any political leaning, I'm only saying that the only context I've seen that in is from people like that. My main exposure to this sort of thing is via the YouTube scene, which is filled with the kind of people spouting this sort of mental rhetoric about the 'feminist agenda' trying to overthrow the world. Sargon of Akkad, The Amazing Atheist, Paul Joseph Watson, Davis Aurini, ect...
Yeah the far right is actually used to refer to followers of Richard Spencer and the segregation of the races, it used to be used to refer to everybody right of the far-left but it was hijacked by the white supremacist, disagreeing with feminism doesn't mean they want to ship all black people back to Africa that's a big leap on your part (your legs must be tired)

Edit. I put everyday instead of everybody dam you Auto-Correct
 
Last edited:
Yeah the far right is actually used to refer to followers of Richard Spencer and the segregation of the races, it used to be used to refer to everyday right of the far-left but it was hijacked by the white supremacist, disagreeing with feminism doesn't mean they want to ship all black people back to Africa that's a big leap on your part (your legs must be tired)

I'm not entirely sure it is such a huge leap to assume people who might be against gender equality might also be against racial equality, but hey ho. It's also probably not incorrect to say that the views of someone on a certain topic might be 'far right' whilst being different on other matters. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and let you use whatever term you want to describe yourself, however, it doesn't change my original point.
 
I'm not entirely sure it is such a huge leap to assume people who might be against gender equality might also be against racial equality, but hey ho. It's also probably not incorrect to say that the views of someone on a certain topic might be 'far right' whilst being different on other matters. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and let you use whatever term you want to describe yourself, however, it doesn't change my original point.
I'm for equality of opportunity not outcome because believe it or not stopping men from applying for jobs is discrimination not matter how you dress it up, Feminist don't have a problem discriminating against men so they are not for equality and I would never associate myself with people who discriminate against half the population.
 
My god just came back to this after the day and does it look like I ever opened a can of worms. My points are though:
The media and the government (or politicians) are independent of each other, though the media will choose to support some brand of politics whether it's because of who owns them or who runs them

Politics is far more fluid and complicated then I dare think, that's why I don't go into it that often, the problem today is everyone is loving the game of amateur politician but they don't have the full idea of what they are talking about, often look like the extremists at times and only have selfish policies, with no thought on how it affects others

And dude Murdoch may own things like bskyb but he's far from running them. The BBC was allowed to exclude white men for some of their job vacancies a while back. Diversity hires don't work because if there isn't enough black/Brown/transgender people or women in certain jobs guess what, there's not enough of them applying because next to none of them want the job
 
And giving someone a job because the colour of there skin and what's between there legs is sexiest and kinda racist, it's like saying to women your not good enough to compete with men for the job so we're going to give you a leg up because your gender is inferior.
 
Feminist don't have a problem discriminating against men so they are not for equality and I would never associate myself with people who discriminate against half the population.

I feel like this is an overly sweeping statement. You'll probably find the majority of people who identify as feminists are looking for quality, not for an advantage over men.
 
I feel like this is an overly sweeping statement. You'll probably find the majority of people who identify as feminists are looking for quality, not for an advantage over men.
If there looking for equality then they should look in the mirror because they have it, I don't see how getting women fired from there jobs actually helps women, it's actually the complete opposite
 
Off to bed but before I go I thought I'd share this youtuber's efforts at creating decent digital transfers of the Mighty Max series which has only ever been officially released on VHS: Mighty Max Restoration Project

(I want this series remastered badly :p, it has the ultimate voice actor combo of Tony Jay & Tim Curry)
 
Murdoch may own things like bskyb but he's far from running them.
My point in bringing up the Murdoch owned press, along with other right-wing tabloids, was to debate Ken’s point about journalism being fulll of militant feminists. Whatever say you think Murdoch himself has in his holdings, I don’t think you could accuse any of his news outlets of pushing such ideas. I think it would take a special kind of denial (or a special kind of extreme belief) to suggest Murdoch’s papers and TV channels have a liberal bias, let alone a militant one. And the same goes for the aforementioned tabloids.

I feel like this is an overly sweeping statement. You'll probably find the majority of people who identify as feminists are looking for quality, not for an advantage over men.
This is exactly what I meant when I said earlier it’s impossible to make statements regarding what “feminism” is or is not. If you look at only the most extreme militant feminists, then use that to declare “I hate feminism” then you’re making enemies of even the reasonable people who identify as such and in the process, turning yourself into an extremist in their eyes. I don’t think that helps dialogue or reasonable debate - Does making sweeping statements about a whole bunch of people ever have a positive effect?

I know some people will say “Well the reasonable people should stop identifying as feminists because the term is tainted” but that’s not how people work. There are always a variety of people under any banner who disagree on its meaning. There are extreme conservatives, liberals, feminists, men’s rights activists, environmentalists, but those groups also contain plenty of reasonable people who have a point. It seems like saying every conservative who doesn’t agree with Jacob Rees-Mogg should stop calling themselves a conservative because they hold more moderate conservative beliefs - It’s like surrendering the term to a vocal extreme minority within the group, which most reasonable conservatives (or feminists) would understandably not want to do. The broad political space "conservatives" inhabit belongs as much to Ken Clarke as it does to Boris Johnson, Anna Soubry or Rees-Mogg. They may have vehement disagreements, but they're still all conservatives. Feminism is no different.

If there looking for equality then they should look in the mirror because they have it
I think it’s pretty clear there are a lot of areas of society (not to mention a lot of areas of the world) where that’s far from the truth and attitudes to men and women are not the same, or fair. That’s not to say I disagree with some of the things you and others have said about equality of opportunity or am in favour of positive discrimination, because I’m not. But I don’t think that means people who want equality should pack up and go home because equality has been achieved, because b*ll*cks has it.

There’s still a hell of a lot of casual racism and sexism in OUR society which does have an impact on women’s and minorities’ lives both private and in the workplace, and at the very least we need people fighting to educate people not to behave or make decisions based on racist or sexist assumptions. I don’t agree with forcing people to hire a woman for a job, but nor do I agree with someone who interviews a man and a woman for a job but then hires the man, not because he is the better candidate, but because they hold sexist beliefs. Women are still regarded as less capable and competent by some people, women who sleep around are still regarded by a lot of people as sluts while men who do the same are regarded as studs, fathers who stay at home to look after their kids are still looked at by a lot of people with disdain, as are mothers who don't. I think that's why it's important to still have those voices saying no, that's not fair or equal treatment.
 
Last edited:
I think the main problem with all this is that there isn't a clear definition of feminism, and the women who like to actually use their voice on the issue are sometimes wanting an argument anyway. That's more down to people than feminism. Like for example Germaine Greer- she's a cowbag anyway and her definition of feminism is someone who's every action is for the benefit of females. That excludes non-females by definition which doesn't mean just men, but you've got all the LGBTQXYZ stuff (and I still can't get my head round what the acronym means). It's easier to stay out of it most of the time to keep the peace, which clearly I'm not doing now but only because I'm bored and want to say it's probably better to leave it be because both sides have a point but just both put the pointy sticks down and chill. That probably comes with age, but sometimes you have to take the first step and...well...chill. :confused:

So this is me bowing out on this one. Enjoy.
 
It's easier to stay out of it most of the time to keep the peace, which clearly I'm not doing now but only because I'm bored and want to say it's probably better to leave it be because both sides have a point but just both put the pointy sticks down and chill. That probably comes with age, but sometimes you have to take the first step and...well...chill.
Having these kinds of discussions is horribly draining (even when I have had enough sleep) and I often regret getting so involved, but in truth all I really want is for people to just look - Look at the reality of a situation before forming and expressing opinions, rather forming them and having them reinforced inside comfy bubbles. And a comfy bubble for one kind of opinion is the last thing I'd want to see AUKN become. If nobody challenges people's beliefs (especially if they're provably wrong) I think you end up with a more toxic atmosphere where people are afraid to say something for fear of upsetting what they see as the established groupthink, and in this way you can drive people away who don't feel welcome any more because they see that no-one is challenging these ideas. I want everyone to feel welcome here.

I think the main problem with all this is that there isn't a clear definition of feminism
Is there a clear definition of any belief system though? I don't think this is unique to feminism - Socialists disagree with each other on what it means to be a socialist, Christians disagree with each other on what it means to be a Christian. I do think feminism gets singled out unfairly for not having a rigid set of beliefs set in stone where people can say "Yes, if you believe this you're a feminist and if you don't then you aren't one" when no other ideology has that either. People within these ideologies "no true Scotsman" each other all the time even without people on the outside trying to define them and decide whether they are or they aren't what they claim to be. A lot of feminists probably wish Germaine Greer would shut up and go away and stop giving them a bad name but then a lot of socialists think the same thing about George Galloway.
 
seems like saying every conservative who doesn’t agree with Jacob Rees-Mogg should stop calling themselves a conservative because they hold more moderate conservative beliefs
one would think people would stop calling themselves a conservative because they disagree with the impact there policies have had on the country not on there liking or disliking of an individual mp who isn't even Prime Minster, which is exactly how I judge feminism e.g by there actions and goals not the individual, it ok you saying not all feminist are like the ones leading the movement but where were they when the grid girls lost there jobs and the bbc where excluding white men from applying from jobs, probably busy washing there hair perhaps.

not to mention a lot of areas of the world) where that’s far from the truth and attitudes to men and women are not the same,
Its a shame that the feminist and the left in genral are actively making excuses for these culture's that treat women like shi t and force them to cover themselves up
iranian-woman-protests-hijab.jpg
I stand with the brave women fighting these backwards culture's not the so called feminist turning a blind eye because the men who are oppressing them so happen to be not white.


but nor do I agree with someone who interviews a man and a woman for a job but then hires the man, not because he is the better candidate, but because they hold sexist beliefs.
I'd have to see specific examples of this taking place to prove or otherwise disprove it but I agree with you dissemination is wrong, the reason I point out positive discrimination against men and white men in particularly is because it's systematic and is being reinforced by the government on people because of there gender or colour of skin, but the discrimination your talking about is a different kettle of fish entirely to even contemplate all the different variables e.g blonde women are more likely to be hired than brunette women, tall people are more likely to be hired than short people and the list goes on and on, to simply say it just affects women and minorities and is all down to misogyny and racism is very disingenuous of feminist and there solution of positive discrimination isn't just morally wrong but is impractical to say the least.

There’s still a hell of a lot of casual racism and sexism in OUR society which does have an impact on women’s and minorities’ lives both private and in the workplace, and at the very least we need people fighting to educate people not to behave or make decisions based on racist or sexist assumptions
I'd have to specific examples of casual sexism and racism to fully comment on the subject but going off the case's that make the news I'd say these situations tend to prominent where the victim don't have anybody to complain to about it or that the person they are complaining to isn't properly trained to handle these situations, what is needed for this isn't education because let's be honest most people know not to bully people and grab women without there permission because these behaviours are frowned upon in our society and the majority of people don't do theses things, so what we really need is a way of dealing with the people who break the social norms and I think that can be achieved by prominently better HR departments in workplaces and possibly voluntary sexual harassment and anti-bullying courses to the perpetrators to better educate them on how to treat people properly.

In short I think we need to stop blaming half the population for all the bad thinks that happen in society like feminism seems to do and blame the perpetrators of the crimes, not all boys are potential rapist, not all white men are privilege, and not a women are delicate little flowers who need the government to make new laws to protect them from evil men.


Oh and the male of equivalent of slut shaming is calling men dogs and comparing them to animals who want to **** anything with a pulse.

And a none discriminatory and really effective way of breaking social norms and stereotypes on women and minorities is through media like television and movies, I was watching the power puff girls with my niece the other day and there was storyline about a princess waiting for a prince to recuse her from a dragon, but instead of waiting for the prince she took matters into her own hands and kicked the dragons ass which is a very positive way of breaking down negative stereotypes about women, she also always sings that song by Beyonce about girls ruling the world and tries to fight me with moves she learns in jujitsu.

Edit. Properly not probably dam you Auto-correct
 
Last edited:
Back
Top