Thanks for sharing, interesting discussion. Not sure Vice's debate format is very effective at actually bringing out substantive arguments or disagreements though, and some of the disagreements got a bit too heated and missed their points.

From your original pre-edited headline, it seems like you are on the side of the participants who said that women have the same or more opportunities than men (in the US), that feminism is a 'hate group', that abortion is primarily about murder of chilrdren and not women's rights? If so, please feel free to actually offer factual back-up for those views, which unfortunately don't seem to have been aired or perhaps edited out in the Vice group.

Alternatively, if you don't have an opinion on the specific issues but just wanted to illustrate that women shout at each other over feminism, which I think does indicate that these are important issues that women feel strongly about and are happy to debate and argue over, which is surely a sign that feminism is alive and well and very relevant.

Your feedback is very important to us. Please write the substance of your complaint here, in a readable format, and I can make sure Kian sees it. Here, I'll get you started with a template, you just have to fill in some blanks.

Dear Kian,

It triggers me when the LI moderator moderates my posts, and I also want them to not be allowed to express their opinion on LI anymore under the LI mod handle. Especially please ensure the mod is censored if they ask me questions that are too difficult for me to answer or that I don't want to answer because I prefer shitposting things without anyone questioning my shitposting, like I'm used to doing on 4chan/pol where everyone gets very excited about when I post things and never disagrees with me, which is important so I don't get triggered.

I also ________________________________ (insert further arguments here).

Yours sincerely,

Anonymous Guest

Aw well, why is it with these non-wokes that the waterworks start whenever someone tries to talk to or engage with them reasonably? You must understand that the great thing is that anyone can filibuster on LI when they have something to say which actually makes factual points or honestly responds to questions asked (which you have seemed unwilling or unable to do so far). That is literally the only requirement to participate in both LI and society.

Even though your response is not really a response to my question or engagement, I will ask some easy open-ended questions again, though you will likely be unwilling to answer them:

1. Do you consider yourself a feminist and/or a woman?

2. Which parts of the "Indian feminist movement" do you consider to be "the saner minds", and why?

3. Which parts of feminism do you therefore consider to be not sane, and why?

4. Or is your point primarily that all feminists are insane because they don't agree on everything, and some of them shout and are a bit mean to people saying things they disagree with?

Not gonna waste too much time on 'critique' because there is nearly everything factually wrong with what he says, but fundamentally his argument that women need men because men do lots of things in society, is mostly circular.

If there was a society that was more equal and with fewer toxic men like Tate, we'd be having more women police officers, more women in the army, and more women in other male dominated professions. E.g., in Soviet Russia you had lots of women working in factories building cars, the Israeli army is full of women, and throughout history a lot of cool shit has been invented or built by women in disciplines and times were women were very few and far between back then (and often men stole the credit of female colleagues, due to aforementioned toxic broness - if you skipped history class or want to know more, just hit up your search engine of choice and search for female inventors, you'll soon stumble upon lots of examples as well as enlightening stories).

So yeah, sorry, despite your protestations, your comment / Tate's video is trollish and unfactual, unless you have a response of a more coherent standard than Tate's rant.

The anti feminists are hilariously wrong. Saying women dont face barriers to entry is simply untrue legal equality (which is still not ensured in much of the world) and equality of opportunity are two very different concepts. There are studies done that actually analyse and break down causes of things like the wage gap, and the majority of it still boils down to women being forced to bear the brunt of childcare and also the view of women as subservient, both pearl and sydney have no idea what they're talking about, they are literally just regurgitating 2016 youtube anti feminist bs that was centre of academic discourse like 30 years ago and was also debunked.

What people tend to forget about feminism is that it is largely an academic movement, and this academic movement has existed for decades and all these dumb points the anti feminist women seem to bring up boil down to "women are infantilised in culture and thats a good thing" but they dont realise that these same factors limit women in the workplace and financially.

The ignorance radiating from sydney and pearl is so funny because feminism isn't "hurting men" feminism is literally about dismantling the patriarchal systems that cause the high suicide rates and rates of depression that mens rights activist like to tout as "faults of feminism"

Every single statistic they tout can and has been debunked 20 times over, and the fact this thread exists serves only and only to speak to the ignorance that some of you still harbour, and its not a matter of "having discourse" there is an objective right and wrong here, a side that the statistics support and a side they dont.

The fact some of you are in law school where they teach you how legal ethics work or just actual working lawyers and still have a skull thick enough not to understand feminist theory is absolutely baffling.

Also the white haired lady seems to know her theory and its a shame the stupid people keep talking over her