Fake Feminist

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why this is so difficult for some men to understand.

Feminism is about equal rights, not equal outcomes.

I want the *right* to choose who I date, who I marry, who has access to my money, the right to choose what I do with my money, the right to get divorced for any reason, and the right to do what I want with my own body.

That does not mean I want an equal outcome between me and the man I date. I just want the same rights as him.

So I choose to date men who are generous with their money. That is my right. Just like it is your right to only date women who split things 50/50. We both have the right to choose what we want. If we end up single and alone because nobody wants that, well, everyone is exercising their rights freely and that’s what happens. None of us are owed a partner.

If you complain “that’s not fair!” then you are trying to take away my right to choose who I date or if I want to date at all. I get to make those choices for myself, the same as you. And I would absolutely rather be single than deal with some dusty man who wants to split everything 50/50. I’d rather use than money to go out with my girlfriends.

That's not what OP was talking about. He seems to be ok to cover her expenses but doesn't like her being fake and using feminism to suit herself whenever it is needed. She is definitely selfish and I am sure she is not even a feminist because they would have covered their expenses or ended the relationship if see that the partner is uncomfortable. Also, she doesn't have any desire to be in a long-term relationship if she continues to use people like this. Telling daughter to not go 50/50 on expenses is telling them to be sneaky and use the other person. If she is really a feminist then she should have let her daughter decide how she wants to continue the relationship and not push her thoughts on her.

[Anonymous]

Op, did she cover any of the major responsibilities in her previous marriage such as household duties, kids responsibilities, an equal job or was lazy and complaining while sitting at home. If that's the case then she is a narcissist and user. Get out before you get sucked in. This has nothing to do with feminism but her taking advantage of whatever situation she is in.

[Anonymous]

Op here. I am 44 and not really in 50s as some of you guessed. She covered some of the responsibilities in her previous marriage but very resentful about how she was treated and made to do work all the time. She was in constant argument with her ex-H and not on good terms with him.

[Anonymous]

Op has stated the following:

"I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

"Op here. A few of the things that she does is that she has high expectations of gifts, trips and also gifts for her kids which I am fine if she is being honest but her efforts towards my kids and me depends on how she is feeling and always look out for her or her kids benefits. She talks about a blended family but also gets pushy on how I need to raise my kids for which I put strict boundaries and she doesn't that take that well. She could help us with cooking at the home but wants to eat out all the time. If her kids are coming over, then she would cook for sure. She has a huge spending problem and spends more than she makes and in serious debt. A couple of comments she made about her ex-husband that she would not have stayed with him if he wasn't financially supporting her but then shows and give value to her daughters that man should take care of you. How is that sustainable when you are going against your values and contradicting yourself in terms of finance. your partner don't need to make as much as you but there are places in the household that you can contribute. She made a comment a while back that she started dating someone and he was good but then the guy asked to go for 50-50 after 3rd date and he dropped all contacts with him. I am not with her for money and can easily handle the expenses but this hypocrisy bothers me a little and not the way I want to raise my daughter to be dependent on a man.

"Op here. Her daughters are 24 and 20 and not young. Older one has a low paying job after a college degree and her mother expects me to cover some of the frivolous expenses for her daughter and I said NO."

So, reading between the lines here, the OP's partner had a kid at 18 and another one at 22. Assuming that the OP is in the U.S., this patterning likely correlates to a lack of education, critical thinking skills (hence her lack of responsible money management and the cognitive dissonance between her self-proclaimed feminism and her notion that men should be providers), and meaningful career on the part of the OP's partner. And yes, she sounds like an entitled hypocrite. But here's the thing. If the OP is a well-educated, high earning professional, then he's just as much of a hypocrite when it comes to being "liberal" and "progressive" because men who walk the walk in that regard seek out equal partners. The OP's partner is not equal partner material.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op has stated the following:

"I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

"Op here. A few of the things that she does is that she has high expectations of gifts, trips and also gifts for her kids which I am fine if she is being honest but her efforts towards my kids and me depends on how she is feeling and always look out for her or her kids benefits. She talks about a blended family but also gets pushy on how I need to raise my kids for which I put strict boundaries and she doesn't that take that well. She could help us with cooking at the home but wants to eat out all the time. If her kids are coming over, then she would cook for sure. She has a huge spending problem and spends more than she makes and in serious debt. A couple of comments she made about her ex-husband that she would not have stayed with him if he wasn't financially supporting her but then shows and give value to her daughters that man should take care of you. How is that sustainable when you are going against your values and contradicting yourself in terms of finance. your partner don't need to make as much as you but there are places in the household that you can contribute. She made a comment a while back that she started dating someone and he was good but then the guy asked to go for 50-50 after 3rd date and he dropped all contacts with him. I am not with her for money and can easily handle the expenses but this hypocrisy bothers me a little and not the way I want to raise my daughter to be dependent on a man.

"Op here. Her daughters are 24 and 20 and not young. Older one has a low paying job after a college degree and her mother expects me to cover some of the frivolous expenses for her daughter and I said NO."

So, reading between the lines here, the OP's partner had a kid at 18 and another one at 22. Assuming that the OP is in the U.S., this patterning likely correlates to a lack of education, critical thinking skills (hence her lack of responsible money management and the cognitive dissonance between her self-proclaimed feminism and her notion that men should be providers), and meaningful career on the part of the OP's partner. And yes, she sounds like an entitled hypocrite. But here's the thing. If the OP is a well-educated, high earning professional, then he's just as much of a hypocrite when it comes to being "liberal" and "progressive" because men who walk the walk in that regard seek out equal partners. The OP's partner is not equal partner material.

Yikes. Who are you to say what constitutes "equal"? Convenient that corporate feminists want to pull up the ladder or women "below" them on the totem pole to keep "eligible" men for themselves only.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op has stated the following:

"I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

"Op here. A few of the things that she does is that she has high expectations of gifts, trips and also gifts for her kids which I am fine if she is being honest but her efforts towards my kids and me depends on how she is feeling and always look out for her or her kids benefits. She talks about a blended family but also gets pushy on how I need to raise my kids for which I put strict boundaries and she doesn't that take that well. She could help us with cooking at the home but wants to eat out all the time. If her kids are coming over, then she would cook for sure. She has a huge spending problem and spends more than she makes and in serious debt. A couple of comments she made about her ex-husband that she would not have stayed with him if he wasn't financially supporting her but then shows and give value to her daughters that man should take care of you. How is that sustainable when you are going against your values and contradicting yourself in terms of finance. your partner don't need to make as much as you but there are places in the household that you can contribute. She made a comment a while back that she started dating someone and he was good but then the guy asked to go for 50-50 after 3rd date and he dropped all contacts with him. I am not with her for money and can easily handle the expenses but this hypocrisy bothers me a little and not the way I want to raise my daughter to be dependent on a man.

"Op here. Her daughters are 24 and 20 and not young. Older one has a low paying job after a college degree and her mother expects me to cover some of the frivolous expenses for her daughter and I said NO."

So, reading between the lines here, the OP's partner had a kid at 18 and another one at 22. Assuming that the OP is in the U.S., this patterning likely correlates to a lack of education, critical thinking skills (hence her lack of responsible money management and the cognitive dissonance between her self-proclaimed feminism and her notion that men should be providers), and meaningful career on the part of the OP's partner. And yes, she sounds like an entitled hypocrite. But here's the thing. If the OP is a well-educated, high earning professional, then he's just as much of a hypocrite when it comes to being "liberal" and "progressive" because men who walk the walk in that regard seek out equal partners. The OP's partner is not equal partner material.

Yikes. Who are you to say what constitutes "equal"? Convenient that corporate feminists want to pull up the ladder or women "below" them on the totem pole to keep "eligible" men for themselves only.

OP thinks 50/50 constitutes equal and that feminism is about that. So he should date women who only make at least as much as him, and bear 50% of household duties in order for the feminism idea based deal to be fair to women and himself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Op has stated the following:

"I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

"Op here. A few of the things that she does is that she has high expectations of gifts, trips and also gifts for her kids which I am fine if she is being honest but her efforts towards my kids and me depends on how she is feeling and always look out for her or her kids benefits. She talks about a blended family but also gets pushy on how I need to raise my kids for which I put strict boundaries and she doesn't that take that well. She could help us with cooking at the home but wants to eat out all the time. If her kids are coming over, then she would cook for sure. She has a huge spending problem and spends more than she makes and in serious debt. A couple of comments she made about her ex-husband that she would not have stayed with him if he wasn't financially supporting her but then shows and give value to her daughters that man should take care of you. How is that sustainable when you are going against your values and contradicting yourself in terms of finance. your partner don't need to make as much as you but there are places in the household that you can contribute. She made a comment a while back that she started dating someone and he was good but then the guy asked to go for 50-50 after 3rd date and he dropped all contacts with him. I am not with her for money and can easily handle the expenses but this hypocrisy bothers me a little and not the way I want to raise my daughter to be dependent on a man.

"Op here. Her daughters are 24 and 20 and not young. Older one has a low paying job after a college degree and her mother expects me to cover some of the frivolous expenses for her daughter and I said NO."

So, reading between the lines here, the OP's partner had a kid at 18 and another one at 22. Assuming that the OP is in the U.S., this patterning likely correlates to a lack of education, critical thinking skills (hence her lack of responsible money management and the cognitive dissonance between her self-proclaimed feminism and her notion that men should be providers), and meaningful career on the part of the OP's partner. And yes, she sounds like an entitled hypocrite. But here's the thing. If the OP is a well-educated, high earning professional, then he's just as much of a hypocrite when it comes to being "liberal" and "progressive" because men who walk the walk in that regard seek out equal partners. The OP's partner is not equal partner material.

Yikes. Who are you to say what constitutes "equal"? Convenient that corporate feminists want to pull up the ladder or women "below" them on the totem pole to keep "eligible" men for themselves only.

DP. Stop being obtuse. One can correctly infer from OP's first paragraph that he thinks going 50-50 is in line with feminism.

What makes OP "eligible"? Apparently, even a woman who needs him for financial gain does not seem to care about keeping him. He is dating someone who is very unpleasant and burdened with debt, but he thinks the issue here is fake feminism. He ignored all the red flags to be with this woman and is still with her 6 months later. The guy has issues with judgment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

Do you like your GF? You say you do, but it sure as heck sounds like you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

Have you lost her phone number, or why are you asking us when you should be communicating with her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not anti-feminist and (I’ll look for the link) where someone explains the non measurable items women contribute to when thinking about 50/50.

From women make $.67 to your dollar, cost of birth control, the safety issues women face dating and bringing you around her daughter, grocery shopping, eating at her home, the cost of her clothing/makeup/staying fit, the amount of unequal care they offer, on and on and on. Dating is very expensive for women financially, emotionally, etc.

I was just quoted $1500 for an IUd insertion. Not to mention the side effects, extreme pain, removal, etc.

Men really underestimate the BS we go through so they can get laid.

So, you don’t want sex for yourself?

Weird. I had an IUD inserted so I could have a piece of mind when I have sex.

PP. I prefer using condoms, because I don’t like the side effects of BC and I don’t like pain. It can also be quite expensive.

I’ve found about half of men are fine with condoms, the other half complain they can’t feel anything. Very difficult to find one willing to get a vasectomy, even if they don’t want kids.

It’s very weird to me that men can be okay with a woman they claim to care about go through excruciating pain or bad side effects, just so they don’t have to wear a condom.

So if I have to compromise and do something I don’t really want to do, and pay a lot of money for it, I expect men to do the same in some way. Or, they can wrap it up.

I have no interest in men who refuse to wear condoms and also want to split things 50/50. That’s entitlement, and it’s a total ick.

You sound like a child when you use that phrase. Who talks like that?

And children shouldn’t be having sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand why this is so difficult for some men to understand.

Feminism is about equal rights, not equal outcomes.

I want the *right* to choose who I date, who I marry, who has access to my money, the right to choose what I do with my money, the right to get divorced for any reason, and the right to do what I want with my own body.

That does not mean I want an equal outcome between me and the man I date. I just want the same rights as him.

So I choose to date men who are generous with their money. That is my right. Just like it is your right to only date women who split things 50/50. We both have the right to choose what we want. If we end up single and alone because nobody wants that, well, everyone is exercising their rights freely and that’s what happens. None of us are owed a partner.

If you complain “that’s not fair!” then you are trying to take away my right to choose who I date or if I want to date at all. I get to make those choices for myself, the same as you. And I would absolutely rather be single than deal with some dusty man who wants to split everything 50/50. I’d rather use than money to go out with my girlfriends.

Ah. “Choice feminism.”

This isn’t actually what the women’s liberation movement was about at all. But you do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am dating my recent gf of 6 months and she is 42. Overall, talks a big game that she is a feminist and women's rights etc but never go 50-50 on anything. I am very liberal and progressive and agree with most of the things she says about women etc but don't understand why her walk is different than her talk. I like her and have no problem spending $s as I make a lot more than her but she sometime acts like an entitled person and wants man to take care of her like in traditional setting. Not only her, but she is also teaching her young daughter to not go 50-50 on anything with her bf and counts a small thing such as driving to see him for 50 miles as enough contribution that he should take care of all the expenses for the weekend such as hotel, food, going out for drinks, etc. Is she really a feminist if her beliefs and values are in such a way that she can't even afford her own self?

You're dating someone with a child. Where is the father?

Op here. Her kids are older and in college or recently out of it. Kids father is around and have a good relationship with the daughters but my gf likes to get extra involved and run quickly to help her grown kids and expects me to support unnecessary demands which I refuse. She constantly tracks their location and gets very obsessive with what they are doing. On top of her expecting financial support, she gets very pushy with her demands and looks like it is time for me to break-up with her. This is not what I expected in my relationship with her and I am going to end it before I get more resentful or it becomes toxic.

So break up with her already and stop complaining to us about it. And learn what feminism actually is. I suggest starting with The Feminine Mystique or A Room of One’s Own.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not anti-feminist and (I’ll look for the link) where someone explains the non measurable items women contribute to when thinking about 50/50.

From women make $.67 to your dollar, cost of birth control, the safety issues women face dating and bringing you around her daughter, grocery shopping, eating at her home, the cost of her clothing/makeup/staying fit, the amount of unequal care they offer, on and on and on. Dating is very expensive for women financially, emotionally, etc.

I was just quoted $1500 for an IUd insertion. Not to mention the side effects, extreme pain, removal, etc.

Men really underestimate the BS we go through so they can get laid.

So, you don’t want sex for yourself?

Weird. I had an IUD inserted so I could have a piece of mind when I have sex.

PP. I prefer using condoms, because I don’t like the side effects of BC and I don’t like pain. It can also be quite expensive.

I’ve found about half of men are fine with condoms, the other half complain they can’t feel anything. Very difficult to find one willing to get a vasectomy, even if they don’t want kids.

It’s very weird to me that men can be okay with a woman they claim to care about go through excruciating pain or bad side effects, just so they don’t have to wear a condom.

So if I have to compromise and do something I don’t really want to do, and pay a lot of money for it, I expect men to do the same in some way. Or, they can wrap it up.

I have no interest in men who refuse to wear condoms and also want to split things 50/50. That’s entitlement, and it’s a total ick.

You sound like a child when you use that phrase. Who talks like that?

And children shouldn’t be having sex.

It’s pretty standard colloquial speech. You sound like a Boomer. Boomers really shouldn’t be inserting themselves in discussions because, well, nobody cares what you think anymore when you’re old and out of touch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Feminism is misogyny in disguise.

Only low IQ people fall for the feminist propaganda.

Repeating inflammatory bullshit like this doesn’t make it more credible, troll.

[Anonymous]

OP and his girlfriend sound like they deserve each other. I would love to hear them debate the trans in girls' sports issue.