The Lord, Lawlz, and Original Poster are all from New Jersey...

concepts can't show things

Algebra is a concept. So is science. They can show you a lot of things

you somehow manage to convince yourself that quoting a feminist in a way that makes feminism look less than credible is misogyny.

>dredging up some crazy old pamphlet that literally nobody cares about
>posting it in a completely unrelated internet forum alongside a non-controversial feminist campaign
yes, i bet OP definitely doesn't hate women

Algebra is a concept. So is science. They can show you a lot of things

no, they are the things

mathematicians and scientists show you the things

abstract concepts cannot do things

Edited 4/11/2015 20:00:40

when the clever hunters reproduce, they pass on their smart genes to their daughters

I thought about this, and you are right. What I am about to say is no way proven science:

Wouldn't the "super intelligence" gene naturally be on the Y chromosome? If said gene were on the X chromosome, wouldn't females be significantly smarter?

Again, that is just my thought process, not necessarily true

it's arguably factually true. women are denied education, and can be tied to the household in patriarchal societies, ie backwards societies. they would therefore be less intelligent than the men, as part of their designed subjugation.

intelligence/intellect is a non-scientific term so it's improvable. but, for example, female illiteracy rates are higher worldwide. (i surely don't need to look this up to know it's correct.)

to say "women are naturally intellectually inferior to men" would be inherently misogynistic, though.

i agree with everything you said, if we chose to include "education" or 'illiteracy" in the evaluation of "intelligence". I get that this could be a use (or abuse in my opinion) of the word intelligence. Wich i think was your point when you said that intelligence was not a scientific term and therefore could be used in various context with different meaning. My understanding of the word intelligence is in a general way the mental capacities (wich i guess can be inhibited by the lack of intellectual stimulation)

That said, i hardly think this was the point OP was trying to make with this quote, as such a definition would require clarification.

Edited 4/11/2015 20:11:44

@The Lord: here is the exact quote of my first post

Are you blind or just plain stupid? What do you think #HeForShe means? He uses a feminist name to spread his misogynistic ideas.

Do with it what you wish, i've made my point, i'm done with you

@Benjamin628

Wouldn't the "super intelligence" gene naturally be on the Y chromosome? If said gene were on the X chromosome, wouldn't females be significantly smarter?

You assume there is a "super intelligence" gene, wich is almost certainly incorrect
And you assume that survival is only due to "intelligence", wich is also almost certainly incorrect.

Edited 4/11/2015 20:13:40

it's possible for a woman to say something misogynistic, or be a misogynist. and it's important to take criticism from whoever it comes.

if a person is talking shit you can challenge them regardless of gender. that's equality son. letting mad sociologists chat all kinds of shit is detrimental to feminism, since it gives ammunition for misogynists to deride feminism. which i suspect is what op is doing

What 123ch456 is doing is saying that this particular feminist woman is a misogynist because she says things that can be viewed as less than favourable to feminism. OP did not misrepresent the meaning behind Villar's text. It's a very strange position to take, and I kindly advised ch to shut up and listen instead of calling people misogynists for no reason.

Also, if a person or an ideology is talking shit, then you can challenge them regardless of your gender or ideology. It's important to take criticism from whoever it comes. We agree here. But then you go on to suggest that Villar's text shouldn't be quoted here, because it can be understood as criticism of feminism, and therefore giving ammunition to anti-feminists. Why do you think that is bad? Do you think feminism should be above all criticism?

The Lord i am tired of repeating this to you. I never said Villar was a misogynist. I said that her quote in the context of OP's post is mysoginistic. I don't know Villar and it absolutely doesn't matter in my argument.

yeah i agree with you mostly, and your english is very good

Wouldn't the "super intelligence" gene naturally be on the Y chromosome?

why would it be? 97% of chromosomes aren't Y, so it's more likely not to be. it is feasible that in a species, the one sex could be more intelligent than the other. in the same way that men are slightly taller and stronger than women in our species.

but in countries with equal education, the women don't prove themselves to be less academically capable, so it is evidently not the case in humans. although women are said to be more or less apt than men in certain subjects, so there is obviously some differences generally.

If said gene were on the X chromosome, wouldn't females be significantly smarter?

not necessarily, because men have x chromosomes too. i can't really answer this, but genetics is a lot more complex than you seem to think. for a characteristic like intelligence, there are going to be countless genes which play a part, and they will combine in extremely complex ways. but in school you'll only get taught about what happens when a phenotype is determined by just two genes.

@The Lord: here is the exact quote of my first post

Are you blind or just plain stupid? What do you think #HeForShe means? He uses a feminist name to spread his misogynistic ideas.

Do with it what you wish, i've made my point, i'm done with you

Precisely! You think that using feminist arguments or statements against feminism is misogyny. For the last time: OP did not misrepresent what Villar wanted to say. What you are saying here is that criticism of feminism is misogyny, regardless of arguments. You should listen to X who says that taking criticism from everybody is equality. Saying that all critics of a particular ideology are misogynists/fascists/communists is dishonest and stupid.

Thread ignored.

He4She played one game and is level 5. This was a 3 Player FFA. Lawlz is a high enough level to give her 4 levels in one game. Maybe another alt was in it

Lawlz, the Lord, and this person are all from New Jersey.

Average Multi-Day Game Speed - 0 minutes.
Average Real-Time Game Speed - 0 minutes.

The Lord i am tired of repeating this to you. I never said Villar was a misogynist. I said that her quote in the context of OP's post is mysoginistic. I don't know Villar and it absolutely doesn't matter in my argument.

Tell one more time how tired you are, and maybe we will take you seriously.

You dont't need to know Villar personally, but you should understand what she is saying if you wnat to criticize her text (which OP quoted without misrepresentation). What you are saying is that criticism of feminism, even if valid, is always misogyny.

But then you go on to suggest that Villar's text shouldn't be quoted here, because it can be understood as criticism of feminism, and therefore giving ammunition to anti-feminists. Why do you think that is bad? Do you think feminism should be above all criticism?

i didn't say the quote shouldn't be posted here. i asked why you would conflate it with a campaign for equality if you weren't a misogynist.

i think misogynists on the internet cherry-pick absurd feminist tracts to portray feminism as absurd. as a consequence, many people consider feminism to be something bad, which harms the advancement of equality.

i don't think there's any point in criticising the works of an irrelevant academic, that you only brought up because they were so bad. that's helpful to nobody. i bet you OP didn't find that while he was out harmlessly surfing the world wide web. it was probably posted on some antifem hole, like /pol/ or some MRA subreddit. i bet you the works of whatever her name was are read and studied by more antifeminists than feminists.

tl;dr a lovely example of strawmen

For the last time: OP did not misrepresent what Villar wanted to say.

no, that's because she already gave them enough rope.

tell me though, what do her ideas have to do with this campaign op is trying to tarnish?

Edited 4/11/2015 20:32:46

What you are saying is that criticism of feminism, even if valid, is always misogyny.

Yeah right, i totally said that, in that alternate universe you live in. Not in this thread though

What you are saying is that criticism of feminism, even if valid, is always misogyny.

>unnecessary rewording of a perfectly simple and understandable comment
>not a strawman
pick one

You think that using feminist arguments or statements against feminism is misogyny.

What you are saying here is that criticism of feminism is misogyny, regardless of arguments.

Saying that all critics of a particular ideology are misogynists/fascists/communists is dishonest

What 123ch456 is doing is saying that

But then you go on to suggest that

>hitting the strawman this hard
learn some new fallacies m80

Edited 4/11/2015 20:44:52

also, nothing in OP's quote has anything to do with feminism. maybe that author is a feminist, but the stuff in OP's quote is just philosophy or sociology. and it does skirt misogyny, certainly if it is intended to apply to modern-day first world countries, where women are usually more-or-less intellectual equals of men.

Kill the thread

you just revived it, congratz

feminism = facism
male dominance = stupidity.

stupidity v. facism, which is worse?

i didn't say the quote shouldn't be posted here. i asked why you would conflate it with a campaign for equality if you weren't a misogynist.

Precisely. Conflating a text written by a feminist to criticize feminism is misogyny, because, you know, criticism of feminism equals misogyny. You always find some excuse to call it misogyny, just like your misguided friend ch, yet you vehemently deny it.

i think misogynists on the internet cherry-pick absurd feminist tracts to portray feminism as absurd. as a consequence, many people consider feminism to be something bad, which harms the advancement of equality.

So a critic of feminism quotes a feminist talking about women, does not misrepresent what she is saying, and you call that cherry picking. And of course, the critic of feminism must be a misogynist, as you cannot distinguish between a gender and an ideology. What happened to your ideas about everyone needing to take criticism? You just hate it when somebody criticizes feminism, so you paint them as evil misogynists. You talk a lot about strawmen, that must be because you use them incessantly.

i bet you OP didn't find that while he was out harmlessly surfing the world wide web. it was probably posted on some antifem hole, like /pol/ or some MRA subreddit. i bet you the works of whatever her name was are read and studied by more antifeminists than feminists.

So if you cannot attack the message, attack the messenger, right? A surefire way to spot someone who knows they have lost the argument. I am not OP. Try harder.

tell me though, what do her ideas have to do with this campaign op is trying to tarnish?

I interpret it similarly to Beren. It was a fake display of female powerlessness, in order to get men do all the work for women. HeForShe, after all.

Anyway, this is the last comment I have for this thread. Not much more to say if all I'm going to hear that everyone who dares to criticize feminism is an evil misogynist white hetero cis-gender male pig.