My little disagreement with rouges earlier brought this to mind; why, if it is about gender equality, are we still calling it feminism?

For those who don't know, women and men are equal under the law. Both are protected by the law, though women tend to fair better in court. To learn more you can consult Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

There are exceptions, such as private clubs and such (also many lawsuits), but for the most part, the law states that discrimination unrelated to performance is wrong and susceptible to litigation.

So that's that. So what else is supposed to be done? Force men and women to be the same? Or maybe give women handicaps so they can do better, even though they already dominate schools and there is evidence that they now make more money out of college than their male counterparts do? That doesn't sound like equal opportunity to me. It sounds like something an authoritarian state would conceive of.

So, with all this in mind, why is it still called feminism, and why are we still pushing for more stuff for women? They could call it egalitarianism and win over a lot of people if they just stopped being hypocrites and actually gave boys some TLC for once. The name feminism excludes men entirely from the picture, and in some cases the movement is downright hostile. The people comprising feminist organizations do not necessarily alleviate that hostility.

No more of this nonsense about micro-aggression and such. Attacking and excluding males certainly isn't going to benefit the movement, if that's what is intended. All it will do is damage young males, which will in turn damage females down the road when they're looking around and realizing that, when it comes to finding a decent mate, they're straight-up fucked. Everyone loses.

TL;DR - Women and men are equal under the law, and it's time for people to work together to achieve something of substance, rather than draw lines in the sand, build crappy huts and throw sticks and stones at each other.

To disambiguate it from the feminization of fish by pseudo-estrogens.

Something tells me this isn't accurate.

There is something sweet about seducing a feminist and getting her pregnant.
Then you can say "Fooled you!" again.

I think not. Whatever this is supposed to mean. I must be missing the joke somewhere.

You are overthinking the issue and I am messing with you. There are militant feminists, but most of them just want equality. They just got a smack in the face when Clinton was so easily demonized by tRump. Their loss is our loss too. Let's talk about it again in four years, OK?

It's cool. As much as I b!tch about feminism, all my lovers aside from one have been feminists. And the one who wasn't was by far the worst. They tend to have the most passion and interests, which I like. Still doesn't mean I can't complain about the flaws in their religion ... I mean, civil rights movement.

As you admit yourself, being equal under law and being equally treated by the law are two completely separate things.
I think you also forget about how equally treated they are outside of the law - I forget whether you are four or five times more likely to be murdered by your husband than by your wife. That doesn't seem especially equal to me. What's the ratio of sex attack s by men versus by women?

As for women fairing better in the courts - what's the conviction rate for rape again?

So what's the plan? You've identified a problem. What's the plan?

I never said that we shouldn't identify problems that women face and try to solve them, by the way. It should be a collaborative and not a 1-sided process, and boys, who are clearly struggling to fit into today's world, could also use some attention.

And don't say "men need to organize their own groups" because when they do, they are ridiculed into oblivion and you have incidents like Big Red at Toronto. Of course, part of that is because MRAs are such insufferable losers.

Too many people identify problems but have absolutely no (good) ideas toward solving them. There was a point on here when I made a thread about solving poverty in the black community, after people had been bitching about the subject. Guess what? Crickets.

The plan is a recognition that equality doesn't actually exist yet. The plan is to ensure that equality in all aspects of law goes beyond a piece of paper. The plan is to educate young men with regards to consent and respect. The plan is to ensure people are chosen on merit not on their genitals. Its called feminism - you denounce the lack of plan whilst simultaneously saying that there is no need for a plan in your OP - do you not see the contradiction there?

Too many people identify problems but have absolutely no (good) ideas toward solving them.

So what? If I identify an issue with my computer does it make me wrong for identifying it if I am not capable of fixing it? Does it make the problem with my computer somehow less valid simply because I'm not the one who can personally come up with a remedy? Surely the first step to solving any problem is agreeing that there is a problem in the first place? Your original post might imply that even that has not been established as of yet.

The conviction rate for all crimes is low. Women expecting accused rapists to immediately be sentenced and locked away forever the millisecond after they're accused is an example of female entitlement.

>>12
Two thirds of murders in the US result in a conviction I believe. I think the same stat for rape is 0.6%. I believe the stat is that for every 1000 rapes there are six resulting incarcerations - compare it to something else with low conviction rates that is a far less serious crime such as robbery and for every 1000 committed 20 people rare incarcerated. For assault and battery that figure leaps to 33. Yeah, entitled females, expecting rape to have a conviction rate equivalent to A&B.

>>13
Although my terminology was initially wrong, you are also very wrong. Like very fcking wrong. Zero point six percent conviction rate?? https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/mar/19/myths-about-rape-conviction-rates

Jesus Christ dude stfu.

Feel free to go back and read what I wrote - 1000 rapes lead to six incarcerations - that takes into account reporting rates, arrest rates, conviction rates and incarceration rates. The figures I provided were US data taken from the NCVS. that 58% figure only applies once a case has already reached court - out of 1000 rapes only 310 are reported, of those only 57 result in an arrest, only 11 of those are referred to a prosecutor, 7 of which lead to conviction (hence your around 60% figure) and 6 of those lead to incarceration. Last time I checked 6 incarcerations out of 1000 rapes would be 0.6%. Jesus dude learn to read!

For assault and battery 627 are reported, 255 lead to arrest, 105 get refereed to prosecutors, 41 become a felony conviction and 33 incarcerations.

And before you leap in with the 'obviously more incarcerations as there are more reported' - of just the crimes reported A&B is still more than twice as likely to result in incarceration and three times more likely to result in a conviction.

The difference is husbands who murder their wives are more than likely going to be convicted. A woman who does the same to her husband has a good chance of being let off the hook. Even if she is convicted, she'll more than likely serve a much shorter sentence than a man would. Cases of women physically assaulting their husbands typically result in the man being arrested, even when he did nothing at all.

As for rape, what about men who are made to penetrate? According to domestic violence statistics, this happens about as frequently as forceful penetration. And this gets prosecuted and convicted even LESS. Where is the Feminist outrage over this? Oh right, there is none. Feminists were the ones who pressured the government to exclude "made to penetrate" from the legal definition of rape.

So you're right. Women are not treated equally under the law. They are treated BETTER. Or, as Feminists call it, "equality."

The difference is husbands who murder their wives are more than likely going to be convicted. A woman who does the same to her husband has a good chance of being let off the hook

Evidence to support such a claim please

Even if she is convicted, she'll more than likely serve a much shorter sentence than a man would.

Murder is a mandatory life sentence, where's the variance. And the sad fact of the matter is truly horrific crimes involving years of abuse are more likely to be committed by men against their wives than vice versa.

As for rape, what about men who are made to penetrate? According to domestic violence statistics, this happens about as frequently as forceful penetration

No it doesn't - not even close - lets see you produce the stats please (and do insure that its female on male rape - not including homosexual couples).

And this gets prosecuted and convicted even LESS

Source please.

Feminists were the ones who pressured the government to exclude "made to penetrate" from the legal definition of rape.

And again - source please - are you just going to continue making up claims?

Modern feminists just want to take as much as they can, they're like spoiled kids who just want more and more without ever having to work for any of it. They'll throw scary sounding stats at you like how women get killed by their husbands and whatnot, meanwhile it's men dying all the time for women.

Men break their backs working dangerous, soul-draining jobs to pay the majority of taxes meanwhile women are bigger tax consumers on average (despite having less children these days). Women are also the bigger spenders in a household than men, effectively spending far more than what they make on average. The courts always favour women, meaning they can take your money and take your kids away, while still forcing you to pay for them. Women are succubi, they'll just keep bleeding you dry until there's nothing left, and then they'll move on to the next willing idiot.

It's no surprise at all that there's resistance movements like MGTOW gaining popularity. Hell in Japan it's already taken full effect, since Japanese women have to be the most demanding and entitled women on Earth. People just say it's because Japanese men are betas and have no social skills, but it's actually because they're tired of women's bullshit. Once someone invents realistic sex robots and some kind of way to asexually reproduce, only the most desperate, needy men will ever bother with a relationship again.