Hardebaryor:
Candace Owens, a victim of feminism lamented at the Young Women Leadership Summit (2019) saying:

"I learned too late that feminism was a scam. Today, I'm 55, I'm unmarried, and I've passed the age I can have children. I have to take medicine to help keep me happy and my medication. That is the scam of feminism. If there is anything I could go back and do; I would have warned myself against the scam of feminism."

Feminism is not a scam, infact feminism fought for women's rights they're enjoying today e.g the rights to vote, education, politics, work etc

Feminism is not a scam, give them a good credit for what they've done in history.

Feminism didn't tell any woman not to marry, it's only about fighting for women rights.

Merriam Webster dictionary defines feminism as

1: The belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities,

2: Organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

*Similar Terms:* #women liberation #womanism #Feminism #gender equality #Equalism

Correct.

I wonder where it says not to marry in this definition.

Without an iota of doubt, the feminism idea is antithetical to major world religions, more particularly - Islam. The feminist concept is alien to the Muslim world. In fact, it is not wrong to consider the term "Muslim feminist" as a suitable example of a paradox.

Yes it's very oxymoron to use "Muslim feminists". Islam is a patriarch Religion that degrade women, a misogynistic Religion at it best.

I created a thread on this.
https://www.nairaland.com/5940207/muslim-feminists-oxymoron

With only a few Qur'an verses, the feminism propaganda is utterly deconstructed, and a "Muslim feminist" may have to choose between Islam and feminism. Certainly, the two beliefs are mutually exclusive.

Yes.

However, in this modern age, it becomes pertinent to resist the feminism movement not only from theological approaches but also via appropriate scientific criticisms. This often reveals why the call to "gender-equalism" is unnatural, irrational, and dysfunctional.

You definitely don't understand feminism. It's about "equal rights" not "sex equality". Humans in general are not equal, we've different abilities we can do, so we're all not equal but to have equal rights? That's what feminism is fighting for and I see nothing wrong with this ideology.

Thence, this article seeks to flaw the growing trend of feminism activism vis-a-vis a science-based approach.

Ok, let's see.

1. Human biology

Agitating for 'equality of gender' is like crying over the spilled milk. Naturally, both physical and physiological features of the two sexes differ a great deal and no amount of surgery or transplants can make a woman become a man (and vice versa). Each sex was designed to perform specific but complementary roles toward achieving the general goals.

If gender binary is truly a social construct as claimed by some feminists, why shouldn't the campaign include "Say no to Female Menses," because the male counterpart is free of periodic menstrual discharge? In addition, none of their campaigns has ever featured "Men must carry a pregnancy," at least to share the antenatal burdens. The point here is; if you can't fight against the natural difference in sex, then why protesting against the difference in rights and responsibilities.

According to Aurora Sola' (a pro-feminist):

"The feminist project has been worn down by the anti-scientific attempt to sweep sex differences under the rug, and we have misguidedly set for ourselves the goal of equal representation in certain attractive professions."

It's either you don't get the ideology of feminism or you're just being deluded.

Man and woman are not biologically structured the same way, we have some slight differences in biological features. But is this what feminism are fighting for? No.

Again, like the definition, feminism is about equal right and opportunities in the society, work, home, education etc. Women should be giving the equal opportunities as men. In Saudi Arabia women were not allowed to drive cars because they're "women", they didn't give them the open opportunity to drive cars but with the women right groups in Saudi and global they pressured Saudi give women rights to drive even tho these women rights group in Saudi were arrested.

Now women in Saudi have same rights and opportunities as men to drive cars. You can see the positive struggle of women rights activists.

2. Physics - electricity

Before electricity can become useful, two dedicated pairs of the cable must come together, each performing specific roles. The live wire (+ve in battery source) carries current to the appliance while the neutral wire (-ve) completes the circuit and carries current away from the appliance.

Practically, if men and women should have equal rights and play equal roles, instability sets in. Rather, a gender-based division of labor guarantees high productivity at a reduced cost.

This doesn't make any sense.

Again and again feminism is Opportunities to have equal rights and that opportunities doesn't mean there can't be division of labor nor crumble anything, feminism is saying give women the opportunities as men for a position and if she passes and worthy good for her let her have the position, not because she's a woman she should be deprived from applying for a position. That's oppression!!

3. Automobile vehicles

In moving a vehicle, the driver controls the wheel. Any attempt to wrestle the steering with the driver leads to an accident. Passengers cum passers-by can only be of a guide.

Similarly, a man is socially designated as the family head in most cultures, he steers and moves the family. Wives and children can only make inputs where necessary. This brings about decorum and minimizes confusion. Emulating the "driver-passenger" relationship is sacrosanct for peace to reign. A family where husband and wife enjoy the same rights and perform similar roles can never be progressive even if such marriage is sustainable.

What makes a man the head? Who gave the men to lead in the society? Did the society naturally structured itself or it was created?

Some Women are breadwinners of their home, they earn alot than men in the home and contributes alot, can she be the head of the home? Logically yes, she's worthy of it and If you say no, give any logical reasons why she can't be the head when she's the breadwinner.

Or tell us what logicallly makes the head of a home?

4. Sports - Soccer

In football, we're yet to find a team of 11 men playing against a team of 11 women in the same tournament. The same goes for athletic, boxing, and wrestling games. On the contrary, what we find is women wrestling with men over juicy administrative posts. This gives the impression of the fight against gender discrimination to be absolutely selective.

When will FIFA allow men and women to play football together?

In replying this question, www.quora.com states:

"Never. Unfortunately, you can say what you want about gender equality and all that, but Men are much fit physically than women. Look at the Olympics for example. Watch the Men’s 100m sprint final, it’s faster than women’s 100m final. Watch the weightlifting. Men can lift heavier weights than women. If men and women were allowed to play together, nothing would change. I’m sure some of the top elite females would make it into lower league teams, but the top leagues would remain 100% male. Sorry feminists."

Again I've said it that physically men and women aren't the same, it's ridiculous to put a male boxer against a female boxer.

Now the opportunity of feminism here is to allow women participate in athletic sports, we've seen women in boxing, MMA fights, weight lifting, football, race etc, can an average man fight a female boxer? No, it's a death sentence, a female boxer is trained to fight, she's worthy of it, an average man wasn't trained probably doesn't have interest or worthy to take up the role.

Can a male boxer fight average man? No, that again a death sentence.

My point is, all humans aren't equal, a man and a man are not even equal to begin with but what feminism wants is EQUAL RIGHTS AND OPPORTUNITY.

5. War and Armed forces

Perhaps, the feminists' battle for equal rights and opportunity is limited to selective areas of interest. Currently, men still dominate the military forces of every nation. It seems the feminists fear death, they prefer men being on the danger line. The statistics of women in the biggest armies around the world shows

China: 5%
India: 3%
U.S.A: 16%
Russia: 10%

Nonetheless, a larger proportion of women serving in the military are consigned to medical work and desk jobs, barred from ground combats. In an article titled "Gender inequality in the military service," Joao Carlos and Sofia Menezes noted as follows:

"Recent scientific research has evidenced that women still represent a growing minority in most Western militaries. Women’s integration deserves equal opportunities across all branches and levels of responsibility in the military, however, their expansion to ground combat roles is still a challenge to the military and policy-makers."

Have you read about the Dahomey warriors? They were all female military fighters fighting wars. Why is so? Because they were giving opportunities to participate in wars.

Yes men dominates the military probably because they've more abilities to participate in this field, but should women be deprived from this position? No, they should be giving opportunities reason a woman can sign up to be an army and trained. Most women in the military war zone go for airforce, women rights are still fighting for many women to participate in ground combats as many are ready for it.

Summary:

Feminism emerged as a social struggle seeking to protect the rights of women regardless of cultural and religious standards. More disappointingly, the philosophy of the movement is irreconcilable with natural and scientific facts. The claim that men and women must be accorded the same rights and opportunities in every aspect of life is far from reality. Besides frustrated females and indoctrinated males, who else embrace feminism?

By: Abu Mar'yam Hanafi Abdulkadri

If you were born in the past, you will know that women can't vote, go to school, work, go for political posts, earn properties, become leaders etc if not for feminism you won't be enjoying what you're enjoying today as a woman, you would probably be in the kitchen and satisfying a man in the bedroom, you would have very limit right and opportunities to do things.

So kindly read about feminism and it history and stop making this bias ignorant claims. The ideology isn't bad at all.

LabuleofNigeria:


Your post is dead on arrival

Has anyone forced you to call Allah the "Greatest" ?
Has anyone stopped you from calling/giving yourself the name/title of an "Atheist" ?
Have you for once been arrested by any police for not calling Allah the greatest ?
It is a free world, if you like, call your father the greatest. Everyone has rights to his/her beliefs.

If curiosity demands you to know why Muslims call him "The Greatest", then become one.
Only naughty pigs use science (physical evidence, logic & theories) to approve religion (believe in unseen).
"Believes" are personal entities and can only be proven by "Self conviction"

Unwise post!

ok.

I often hear muslims saying Allah is the greatest which is "Allahu Akbar" on a daily bases.

Is there any "evidence" and "logic" connecting to Allah being great or the greatest apart from the "claims" in the Qur'an and Hadith? Proof what measure his greatness.

It's only Muslims that's making Allah the greatest, take Muslims away and no knows about Allah being great. Anybody can claim anything is the greatest under faith and beliefs, so what evidence and logic makes Allah the greatest?

kozmokaz:
Growing up I was made to believe that of someone dies by drowning, they will have to bury him/her near the water ? How true is this ?

It's just superstitions, no reasonable explanation on why they do the practice.

ukaface:
that's what makes it AFRICA.

Yeah, backward continent.

Xmuslim:
now you are talking

Some post doesn't deserve response. Lol

Maximus69:


According my the Bible "delusion" is when intelligent creatures come together as a group but after all said and done there is no benefit that results from their gathering!

So compare the definition of my Bible with that of your dictionary and have a rethink!
I know your Dictionary will monopolize it as in saying it refers to one person, but let's use our own brains to judge.
We can see an ant roming up and down but since we don't know it's mission we will conclude it's just purposeless. But when ants come together as a group then we will see that they do benefit themselves despite their inability to speak.
So if tiny creatures like ants can come together and work out what benefits them, please how do you explain what happens to humans when we can't do better?

Rather humans keep inventing destructive devices daily to wipe themselves of the surface of the earth. And with all your dictionaries there is no single group of people who have come to reason amongst themselves to eradicate killings and stop building weapons, except those who trust in the Bible (JWs) that formed one big and happy family of peace loving worshipers and there is no single nation where they've not touched to bring out people to agree with this idea!

Please tell me sincerely speaking if the definition of your dictionary is of any benefit beside that of such a book!

k.

GRIMMJOE:
Summary

The dictionary is a book use in explaining concept not to prove said concept exist.

Yes.

Dictionaries are created to find meaning for words which logically follows, it was never created for divinity but for meaning of words. Definitions are agreed upon consensus and widely used by everyone to find meaning for words.

The Bible is said to be divine book where horses fly and snake talk including donkey talking, I don't understand how Bible and dictionary becomes similar.

No one claim dictionaries are divine, the theists here are finding every ridiculous opportunity to drag atheists to their clownery and delusions to feel good at night.

If the Bible is man-made and a dictionary for you good for you, i hope you find the meaning of your delusion in that book.

Maximus69:


Bible is a book just like your dictionary, so if my Bible doesn't count before you please keep your dictionaries to yourself!

Let's talk about what is practically applicable in our society and stop quoting books, is that not what you and your cohorts are saying?

k.

Maximus69:


That's better!
So next time you see someone talking about his God, try to keep shut because there are believers that will silence you in your stupidity!

Anyone that said "oh my God" suddenly believes in God?, when they say many religious people are clowns they thought we're lying.

I thought you guys like arguing based on intellect, why not prove that you don't have any god when i asked you the reason you kept running to pick your dictionaries?

Do you think dictionaries must determine how everyone thinks?

Abegi go and sit down!

Ok, dictionaries are religious books and they're are meaningless to you.

LordReed:


They latch on to any fucking innanity as proof of their god. Utterly ridiculous.

Lol, They're looking for every opportunity to make their imaginary god real. I'm just laughing and having fun with their clownery.

Maximus69:


There is no sense in mentioning "God" if you're 100% sure nothing like that exists Sir!

For you to have typed that, it simply means you are just deceiving yourself!

OH MY GOD!!!

https://www.dictionary.com/e/slang/oh-my-god/

Maximus69:


The bolded is the proof of your insincerity!

If there's no God, then there should be any mention of God talkless personally claiming to have anything to do with God.

For you to have typed that, means you're just deceiving yourself!

Search for the meaning of "oh my God" and stop ridiculing yourself.

TATIME:


This is wonderful!

Please tintingz, who and where is your God?

Oh my f*ckin God!!!

You guys are ridiculous.

Maximus69:


That's the miracle!

Now you tintingz who have always been refuting the existence of God, even to the extent of always rendering his title with small letters (gods) suddenly personified his as your God in capital letters!

Well that's how great God is!

Now you may go and tell your former cohorts that you now have a God and it's one of his Witnesses that opened your inner eyes to this fact!

Oh Jesus Christ!!.

Maximus69:


You can say that again!

GOODNESS is one of the fruitage of God's holy spirit so don't be surprised that this is ABSOLUTELY GOOD! Galatians 5:22

Oh my God!.

DappaD:

Please, do not mind somya-what-ever
The Bible does contain real life accounts and future prophecies
The lies of somya are just what makes people keep believing there is no God

Actually the Bible is full of myths.

Maximus69:

Based on agreement!


Informed worshipers or semi-informed worshipers


Confused or misinformed worshipers

As long as we wake up each day to think, talk, eat, drink, walk, work, dress and do so many other things that insanes do without considering whatever anyone thinks, feels or say, but we try to as much as possible to meet up what is agreed upon as normal surely there is a God/gods somewhere dictating for us all, until we realize this there can never be PEACE in any human society!
We must identify the force dictating how things should be done!

Oh my goodness.

IMAliyu:

If you want to see the scary side of self conviction.
Check out the story of heaven's gate. A suicide cult that yeeted themselves including their leader because they believed something about discarding their physical bodies and alien spaceships. They were convinced in their beliefs to the very end without any shred of doubt and in the last recording of the members they were all excited and happy. The members were not even regular people they were intelligent people programers and engineers. I mean I could read about genocides and not feel disturbed, but this was one of the most disgusting feeling I ever got.
So the thing is if the validity of a belief is based on the conviction of the person, then their belief most be truest one out there.

Very true.

They believe it's true and the only true, no evidence or logic can convince them because it's a belief system.

LabuleofNigeria:

i am a man of my words, we can discuss several other things here but not that. i'm sorry

Ok.

LabuleofNigeria:


How many religions have you researched and practiced ?

I've read about over 30 religious and you know what they all claim? "I'm the right one and others are wrong"

So yours cannot be right.

LabuleofNigeria:


My conviction is simply personal to me. find yours

LabuleofNigeria:


I researched over 8 religions & practices before settling for Islam
If you want details pertaining to my personal conviction, ill suggest we meet-up. This is a public forum. some things are best lef unsaid

Tell me a brief one here.

LabuleofNigeria:
Nigeria alone, dyu know how many mythologies, oracles, beliefs and worships that do exist?
you yourself, how many have you tested and practised before giving up on all and claiming no Creator (you were an accidented dust/collision)

I'm asking you why do you believe Muhammad is right when there are similar claims of his myths in other religions and cultures?

Why do believe Muhammad rode on a flying donkey and Harry Potter didn't rode on a flying broom stick? What's your conviction?

LabuleofNigeria:


Do you know how many religions & mystical claims that exist? thousands
There is more to life than seeking whats not lost. I am contented with Islam.

What if you're wrong?

How can you possibly know you're wrong when you haven't read other mythical books?

What makes you pick only Islam?

LabuleofNigeria:


If you are demanding proof on Prophet Muhammad's claim, he is long dead, take his books and read first, study his speeches first.
Then follow up with research and seek your conviction.

If you are not convinced, move forward to Oyingbo woman and continue same trend till you find your conviction. religion yapa, infact you can start yours

What about reading Harry Potter book? Have you done that to know the truth about his magic?

Have you read all the mythical books? How did you arrive that Muhammad is right?

LabuleofNigeria:


Whats faulty in respecting other people's beliefs and not crossing them?
Learn to be civil, must everyone be like some of your brothers who kill others because they see them as unbelievers ?

Respecting someone's claim is another thing as long as you keep the fairytale to yourself but saying it's the true is another thing.

You can't go about making true claims of your imaginations and don't expect people not to demand for proof? What if the person claim his God command him to kill children?

LabuleofNigeria:

You need not a fellow man's proof for a "Self-conviction". except you are willing to bow to my God and take him as your God first

No, I'm demanding proof from the person that made the claim. He made a claim, he should proof it or keep his fairytale to himself.

Oga, the concept of God became human is not true and unrealistic in this case, Jesus never called himself God.

Don't forget you said your world view is base on subjectivism, so if she claim she's God in human then that's her self-conviction so also Jesus. Or how will you disprove that when you are ok with whatever they claim?

True for their various followers

Lol. Okay.

I don't understand how my topic sound derogatory when I used "I think" and " what do you think".

You're just finding every means to make this thread about conflicts which is not the intention.

LabuleofNigeria:


Opinions/thougths doesnt have to come with evidence, Its knowledge sharing. Good/Correct!
Opinions/thoughts that seems derogatory to others has to be carefully selected and should come with evidences

My Opinion sounded like Insults to you ONLY because its derogatory to your personality

Ok.

IMAliyu:

On the witchcraft and charm thing.
I've heard multiple stories about them but I've never met someone that's done it or seen it in person for myself. So all we have are anecdotal evidence.
But something like the bullet charm thing could very well be surviver bias.
Anyone that does the charm and die due to being shot probably didn't do it correctly or did something that broke it and anyone that didn't die or get shot, due to the gun being jammed or the bullet missed will now be thinking it was because the charm worked. If such charms really worked Africans should had never lost to the European conquers.
On the money rituals thing in Hausa we have the saying "Da kura na yin maganin zawo da yayi ma kan shi"
"If a hyena had the medicine for diarrhea it would had used it on it's self"
If these people could really make money appear magically, wouldn't it make more sense for them to use it on themselves and not to be selling it others. And if it really did work, shouldn't we try to use them to fix our forex shortage problem in the country?
The issue with spiritualism is anyone can claim anything without the need to provide proof because it's not anchored to anything compared to physical scientific claim that can be tested and results should be replicable by anyone anywhere and if not that claim is false.
So what is the established methodology to finding out which form of spiritualism is real or not? Because it would be easy to create a story and feed it to people that are into superstition.

He said anything can be true as long as you're self-convinced. He even accepted my winged yellow giant monkey created the universe.

Anybody can make up nonsense in his world view and said it's the true. Maybe he doesn't see the delusion here and why such ideology is wrong and faulty.