args

Women leaders have a secret agenda to establish a Matriarchy, using feminism as a guiding force

First off, thanks for your insightful and wonderfully supported argument. Although of my extremist stance, you remained calm throughout and did not invalidate your argument by using ad hominem attacks. Instead, you broke it down part by part and refuted it with your (seemingly objective) proof. However, a majority of your proof failed to relate with my argument. I clearly stated that feminist leaders in 1st World Countries, rather than 3rd world and 2nd world countries (which were displayed throughout your arguments) incorporated feminism into their agendas. In addition, I did not state that women in general know of this agenda, that would be ridiculous and counterproductive. In fact, I said that feminists (not women in general), were simply "proverbial sheep", A.K.A pawns on a chessboard used to achieve a goal. Therefore, a majority of your proof, such as men pouring acid on women in various undeveloped M.E. countries, are null and void. In no way, shape, or form would human right violations against women in 2nd and 3rd world countries affect the forming of a matriarchy in 1st world countries. One of the few instances where you tried to display the "need for equality" in 1st world countries, instead of the need of power, was the wage gap chart, which is not accurate and is extremely misleading. Instead of levying the amount of money made per occupation per hour, this "proof" takes a yearly wage of each respective sex and then derives the "fixed" wage (so if a man makes $44,000 and earns $15.00 an hour in a managerial position at McDonalds, for example, and a women earns $28,000 as a waitress, getting paid minimum wage, the same wage as a man in her position, she would be compared to the man-manager instead of her fellow waiter, ergo instead of occupation per-hour it is cumulative wage of men versus cumulative wage of women http://time.com... ) This very article, is a (subjectively speaking) much more credible source than Huffington post and various other liberal- influenced articles, which you have linked. This article also refutes your points of domestic violence within first world countries. You seem to focus on feminism much more than the idea of matriarchy, because I presume by your arguments feminism is striving toward equality, rather than superiority, and thus not only reinforces your strong beliefs of the feminist movement, but also crushes my idea of a matriarchy. Furthermore, a rather disturbing insight from your argument, "That is, because females tend to be seen as sluts, and because of it, deserve to be raped" is both extremely subjective and enormously offensive, for you are objectifying females as sluts. Perhaps more disturbing, you illustrate men as a whole having a lust to rape a "slut" because they deserve it. You are illustrating men as evil and are further supporting your assumed man-hating stance, which would go against your supposed "gender equality". Moving along, you quote Hillary Clinton as if she is a verifiable source, yet it is proven that politicians constantly lie, even publicly to their supporters , to complete their agenda of holding office http://www.politics.co.uk... , even using misleading statistics as you did (When Obama talked about wage gap, using same statistics as you, John Kerry's Vietnam record in 2004, Nixon's Watergate Scandal, etc). Yet another unreliable source about the apparent "inequality" in first world countries. Then you go on to inexplicably take my hypothetical and try to dissolve it, yet fail again. Presidents have an ability to solely declare Martial Law and thus Martial Law revokes constitutional rights, such as holding elections, etc. http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... Thus, you have no supported proof that there is gender equality in first world countries like the USA, Germany, England, etc. Therefore, there must be a reason why you think so, (this is purely conjecture), with the reason being the scripted media, and its power to sway public opinion http://thefreethoughtproject.com... , with this "fact" influenced upon the masses (Sheep) ( A.K.A. brainwashing). Mainstream media can proceed agendas such as Clinton's. If there is no gender equality, then why is the feminist culture so prevalent today? The only logical reason is the push toward superiority and an ultimate matriarchy. Proof of your elevation, not subjugation, are supplied here http://reason.com... . Thanks for your time, and if throughout this I ever seemed to degrade you in any way, it was purely for the reason of getting my point across.