Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
Libertarianism Stamp by BlameThe1st Libertarianism Stamp by BlameThe1st
A libertarian twist on the feminist saying "Feminism is the radical notion that women are people."

Whenever someone like me voices their disdain for "feminism," feminists often retort by asking "Oh yeah? What do you have against equal rights for women?!"

Absolutely nothing! I'm all for equality among the genders. The problem is that feminists only focus on one gender--their gender! They only care about equality for women, not men (despite the inequalities that men face). If you're going to support gender equality, you have to support it for all genders, otherwise, you're a sexist.

This is why I'm a libertarian. I support equal rights for all and special privileges for none. I believe every man and woman has a right to life, liberty, and property, and that they should be free to utilize those rights provided they harm no one. To me, that's the real meaning of equality.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconanarchoautism:
AnarchoAutism Featured By Owner Jan 15, 2017
Unless your poor?
Reply
:iconalex-sucks:
alex-sucks Featured By Owner Jan 9, 2017
more like "the radical notion that I don't have to pay for that shit" 
Reply
:iconiclubbabyseals:
iClubBabySeals Featured By Owner Apr 10, 2016
Human beings are people? Oh, really? I would've never guessed that shit!
Reply
:iconshineyluna:
ShineyLuna Featured By Owner Dec 5, 2015
that description...i think i love you...
Reply
:iconbriannabater:
Briannabater Featured By Owner Oct 22, 2015  Professional Photographer
Corporations too, right?
Reply
:iconshernod9704:
Shernod9704 Featured By Owner Jul 11, 2015
What about children?
Reply
:iconfuckshiru:
fuckshiru Featured By Owner Jul 10, 2015   Digital Artist
I thought libertarian meant you supported freedom of choice, small government, etc.
Reply
:iconpeteseeger:
PeteSeeger Featured By Owner Oct 24, 2014  Student Writer
Libertarianism removes the ability of the government to protect society from itself.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Oct 24, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
It's not the job of the government to protect people from themselves. It is the gov's job to protect people from other people. End of story.
Reply
:iconpeteseeger:
PeteSeeger Featured By Owner Oct 25, 2014  Student Writer
People have a tendency to walk proudly down the road to their own destruction.
And I said society.
Reply
:iconseaxwulf:
Seaxwulf Featured By Owner Jun 27, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Maybe it says more about me than your post. But when this is in the tiny window, I could've sworn it read "Ubertarianism" and I was all "jeezuss... what are they onto now?"

But seriously. Good on you. I often wonder what the United States would resemble were it not ripped up between the utterly deluded notion of a two party system (deluded because there is one party: Republicrat, or Democrican.) Gee, I wonder if it wouldn't resemble the intriguingly potential-laden land that the dusty old Constitution, Articles of Confederation and Declaration of Independence go on about?
Reply
:iconwordsworthsparkle:
wordsworthsparkle Featured By Owner Jun 6, 2014
true true ;)
Reply
:iconmissmuffintop:
MissMuffinTop Featured By Owner May 9, 2014   Writer
Which feminists have you been talking to? o:

I got a doozy for you. Capital punishment is sexist as fuck...against men. Seriously. It feels kind of unconstitutional when half the population is 99% of the executed. What, are women not capable of violent motherfucking crime? C'mon people. xD I'm against the death penalty, so my point out the double standard is both a statement of truth and me being a bit of a casuist, because I'd rather bring men to the parity of women if I couldn't just abolish the policy for being all kinds of illegal, barbaric, unconstitutional abuse of state power rife with uneven application, primarily regarding gender. 

Oh! I have a question. Do people have the right to deny me life, liberty, or property? Like those Christian bakers refusing to do business with LGBT individuals. They're depriving me of the liberty to buy some cake, and of the property of said cake. Which I want to stuff my face with. I'm curious what your thoughts are there. c: 
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner May 9, 2014  Hobbyist General Artist
Well, at least we can agree that the death penalty sucks, or at least how it is implemented. And at least you're honest about the inequalities against men. Seriously, if feminists are going to gripe about how mostly men are in business and political positions, they might as well gripe about how mostly men are prisoners.

"Do people have the right to deny me life, liberty, or property? Like those Christian bakers refusing to do business with LGBT individuals. They're depriving me of the liberty to buy some cake, and of the property of said cake. Which I want to stuff my face with."

No, because you can always go to a bakery that doesn't discriminate against you.
Reply
:iconwordsworthsparkle:
wordsworthsparkle Featured By Owner Oct 3, 2014
touche';)
Reply
:iconmissmuffintop:
MissMuffinTop Featured By Owner May 9, 2014   Writer
In practice, the death penalty goes against the 14th Amendment (especially and primarily along the lines of gender) in addition to the 8th which prohibits barbarity such as botching an execution. If they must, could they just use an overdose of morphine? That would at least not feel bad. And YES I gripe about men being disproportionately represented in prisons, because it's misogyny, is what it is. Oh, yes, there's a misandrist outcome certainly, but the reason we are punished less severely than men is because people don't want to acknowledge women have agency on some level, so they'll dismiss it or try to find a man to blame for our actions instead, rather than admit we actually do things. Which feminists are you thinking of, because there's more than one school of thought in feminism, so you might want to be specific. 

Like I'm a liberal inclusive, sex-positive, body-positive feminist. So like, you can't just pick some women to represent. No imposing one way of being a woman on all women...for example: I think it's wrong to force Muslim women to take their veils off, because her choice is more important than someone else's idea of what women should do. Sex positivity is basically not buying into the lies and fearmongering about sexuality, and the promotion of consent rather than chastity and complaining about pornography existing. Body positivity isn't that complicated, it's just like "Hey, you have a body, good for you!" instead of makin' fun of someone for being short, fat, an amputee, or whatever. That's just mean. 

I've got a bunch of stuff like this to talk about, if you want. The patriarchy hurts everyone, not just women. Like, for example, forcing an image on men that makes it harder for them to report being raped or domestically abused is just...awful. We can't blame victims, that's just fucked up.

Why should "sincerely held religious beliefs"  take precedent over my right to spend my money wherever the fuck I want to? That doesn't make any sense. Seriously, have money, get things. I thought that's how capitalism was supposed to work! If they don't specify why they won't do business with us, it's not illegal (but still repugnant and anti-capitalist), but when they want to openly discriminate, they are being bigoted. I should not have to shop around for someone who doesn't discriminate because it should not be allowed in a free market. My gay money is just as green, and should be treated as such whether the supplier in question approves of me or not. It is not "bullying" to buy things from someone. It's supporting their business, which they should want me to do if they really believe in a free market for everyone, rather than use the marketplace as a tool to promote divisive, anti-liberty bigotry in the name of their allegedly loving God. 
Reply
:iconwillcraft:
willcraft Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013  Hobbyist Writer
If this really is considered radical, governments the world over have gone crazy.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Indeed. Government is extreme. Libertarianism is the norm.
Reply
:iconsonikkubumu:
Sonikkubumu Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
Libertarian has both a different meaning in the US than Europe. As for feminists that focus on their gender and sometimes becoming so radical they become what i like to call 'Far-Right Feminists' where they believe men should be lesser's or even castrated publicly. They are not real feminists in which real feminism is where women fight for the same rights as men, to be shown as much equal respect as a man gets, to get rid of gender rolls. When the radical feminists go off in a rant the real feminist will stand up to men and say that what the radical is saying is not real equality but feminism of a Nazi scale.

I would like to say that men too have inequalities for instants divorce, custody of children, welfare for being a single parent, domestic abuse. Men also are not treated as equally as women.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Yeah, something tells me that Susan B. Anthony would smack Gloria Steinem if she were alive today! :D
Reply
:iconlalala978:
lalala978 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Also, you linked the amazing atheist's video. His stance on feminism has changed a lot since that video.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Perhaps, but his points are still relevant.
Reply
:iconlalala978:
lalala978 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Libertarianism only works if your rich. I'm lower middle class, and my family would never survive without social programs to help us out once in a while.

And feminism deals with problems that are specific to women, like rapeculture (91% of rape victims are female, 99% of rapists are men), job discrimination based on gender, and reproductive rights. You can be a feminist and be for equality for both genders. Feminism just focuses on womens specific problems, doesn't mean you can't also help male problems.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Well it's only fortunate that the increase of capital created through capitalism has led everyone to becoming gradually richer in time, thus raising everyone's living standards. And you assume that people would not care about the poor and needy if the government was not taking care of them through these ineffective social programs?

Rape culture? The Congo has a rape culture. India has a rape culture. America does not. Rape in this country is actually the lowest it has been in 20 years.

Last time I checked, we have laws against job discrimination based on race and gender in this country. Do you mean the "gender wage gap"? That's mostly due to the individual decisions men and women make about employment rather than "institutional sexism."

Reproductive rights? People already have full autonomy of who they reproduce with and when. The issue most have is with abortion and birth control. Do you think a woman's "right to her body" includes killing her unborn child or forcing others to pay for her birth control?
Reply
:iconlalala978:
lalala978 Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013
If women don't have access to safe and legal abortion, they would get illegal, dangerous abortions. It doesn't matter if you think it's an unborn child. And I think birth control should be free for teenagers and have a reduced cost for people without health insurance. It costs less for birth controls then for welfare and abortions :)

Feminism deals with maintaining and encouraging these issues. If we want to help people in the third world with rape problems, we need to look at our society and fix that first before we point fingers.

"And you assume that people would not care about the poor and needy if the government was not taking care of them through these ineffective social programs?"
I know people care. But enough to support, say a single mother of 3 kids who can only work part-time (aka my mom)? If peoples charity was enough to support people, we wouldn't NEED government assistance. But it's not enough. Thanks to the government, my mom got subsidized housing and mother's allowance until my siblings and I where in school and my mom could get a full-time job. Libertariamism only works if you assume the best in fathers who don't raise there children and charity, when people are selfish.
Reply
:iconsonikkubumu:
Sonikkubumu Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I agree 100%
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Libertarianism - the radical notion that corporations are people!

Or is that just capitalism in general? I've lost track
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Sigh. Yet the same misunderstanding of "corporate personhood" and the Citizens United case.

Allow me to provide you with some videos on the subject so you can better educate yourself on the issue:

3 Reasons Not To Sweat The "Citizens United" SCOTUS Ruling: [link]
The Lies about Campaign Finance Reform: [link]
Story of Citizens United v. FEC, The Critique: [link]
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
:iconsomuchwinplz:
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Well, making this stamp only makes you seem arrogant- pretty much everyone recognises human value; ascribing it to your ideology and your ideology only is as preposterous as it is arrogant. I am a humanist, therefore I recognize the value of all human beings, be they black, white, jewish, gay, American, European, you name it. That does NOT mean I think you have to be a humanist to take human rights or equality seriously.

So no, comparing libertarianism to the struggle women worldwide faces every day feels not only invalid, but tasteless to me.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
If you consider this "arrogant" and "tasteless", then you can probably see why others would consider the original feminist quote arrogant, as it implies that other people don't care about equal rights for women or don't think of women as human beings.

The problem most people have with feminists is not that they fight for equal rights for women. The problem is two-fold:

First, feminists complain about how women in America are oppressed. Sorry, but a country that allows women the right to vote, obtain an education, work outside the home for equal pay as men, run for office, and dress how they want is hardly oppressive. If you want to see what real "patriarchy" looks like, consider the Middle East where a young girl was nearly shot for going to school, or India where a woman was raped with an iron rod while her rapist got away scot-free. Whining about how women are oppressed in America only makes feminists look like privileged white girls.

And second, as I mentioned in this stamp, feminists overlook the inequalities that men face: how female circumcision is illegal but male circumcision is not, how domestic violence or rape against men is not taken as seriously as that against women, how custody battles favor the mother over the father, etc. Then again, if feminist truly care about real gender equality, they wouldn't call themselves "feminists" since "feminine" implies for women only.

I consider this definition an accurate one for "libertarianism" since the very philosophy is a modern variant of "classic liberalism," which is where the concept of natural human rights stems from. Without classical liberalism (and with it, libertarianism), there would be no concept of human rights.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013
There is a significant difference between, on the one hand, a genuine struggle for equality and on the other hand, yet another political ideology selling itself as the end-all solution to the world's problems. To compare ideology to the notion that women deserve all the same rights as we men is tasteless in my opinion. Libertarians are not subject to the same kind of struggles. A person will not be generally expected to make less money on the whole because he is a libertarian. He is not expected to face sexual harassment, or other suchlike discrimination, or objectification, or having to work twice as hard for half the recognition. Comparing libertarianism to feminism is only arrogant to me; it is to cloak yourself in a victimhood that is not yours to claim.

So you claim that there are no problems with sexism, then? There is, and to claim there isn't one is to be ignorant. Even in my own country, one of the most gender equal countries in the world, struggles with sexist attitudes- and you think there is no oppression? The oppression is not one of a legal kind, but cultural, and it does hold women back every day. To think mere legal rights solve a problem is to be naive- did racism go away when black attained the same legal rights as whites? To say feminists are "whining" only makes you seem naive at best and ignorant with anti-feminist bias at worst. Women are suffering the effects of this all around the world, west or east, and libertarianism is doing nothing to help them.

But you miss my point. My original point in my post, which is the most important one, is how fucking arrogant it is to think that your ideology alone cares about humanity. You imply it boldly, completely ignoring that EVERYONE cares about human rights. And no, the concept of human rights is NOT owed to libertarianism- it is owed, in its foundation, to human evolution. The basis of our compassion comes from having evolved it for the sake of our group, and all of us recognize human value. You do not get to claim human rights as an invention yours and yours alone; the origins of its philosophy stems from the enlightenment values that paved the way for both feminism and secularism to begin with.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Libertarianism has a far broader range than feminism. Feminism, as I said before, deals with women's issues and only women's issues. Libertarians deal with things like war, police brutality, inflation, taxes, government spending, censorship, civil rights, and pretty much anything else dealing with politics. So excuse me if, while fighting off yet another attempt to censor the Internet, shake people down in airports, police breaking down people's doors during a botched drug raid, or any other infringement on liberty, we roll our eyes when feminists cry "yeah, but what about sexism in video games?"

You make it sound as though racism and sexism can be easily eradicated.

Yeah, and it's those enlightenment values that also led to classic liberalism, now libertarianism. Like I said, without it, there would be no concept of natural rights.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013
Just because there are problems bigger than, say, the prevailing cultural attitudes towards women- as reflected in video games, which undeniably are massively sexist in many occasions- doesn't mean that it should be ignored. Roll your eyes all you want, but it's awareness of sexist attitudes, whether in the work life or in video games, that makes it possible to combat sexism at all.

They cannot- that's the point.

And from this you infer that only libertarianism can care about human rights? This is not only wrong, but absurdly self-absorbed.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Again, at this point, I'm a bit more concerned with combatting assassination attempts against US citizens with drone strikes without evidence than against video games where women wear scanty clothing.

My point exactly. Don't go tilting at windmills.

No, just that the concept of human rights stems from natural rights which stem from classical liberalism which in turn inspired libertarianism. So to say to stand for one and oppose the other is rather ironic to say the least, if not self defeating.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013
And because of this you feel entitled to condescend on issues which are both real and important, but of a different magnitude? When there have been some actual drone strikes against citizens, let me know.

What, because it cannot be erased it shouldn't be fought?

Do you realize how arrogant it sounds, to say that to subscribe to human rights is equivalent to being a libertarian? I support not the libertarian ideology, but I firmly believe in human rights- AS DO WE ALL. You can go on and on about how the origins come from classical liberalism- so you say- but it doesn't change that one does not need to believe in economical anarchy to think that a person has certain inviolable rights.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Another words, you support personal freedom, but you don't support economic freedom?
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Sorry bro but as a pro-abortionist christian hard right libertarian, I'm guessing you care more for abstract "freedom" than for human rights.
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Only if you consider a woman's "right to her body" to include the right to kill her unborn baby and force other to pay for her birth control.
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Would you prefer back-alley abortions? They're pretty ugly but ok bro
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
That doesn't concern me. If people want to kill themselves with something illegal and immoral, so be it.
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Feb 9, 2013
It concerns you because you are ostensibly uphold the law.
Reply
:iconsonikkubumu:
Sonikkubumu Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist Digital Artist
I agree too.
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Thank you :)
Reply
:iconbttlrp:
bttlrp Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Totes agree bro! :)
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
Thanks :)
Reply
:iconkidsapiens:
KidSapiens Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
:iconiagreeplz:
Reply
:icongreatkingrat88:
Greatkingrat88 Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
:)
Reply
:iconspongemuffin:
SpongeMuffin Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013
The feminists who focus only on their gender aren't real feminists, they're women using the label of feminism as an excuse to attack men.

The entire definition of feminism is equality. We fight for rights for BOTH genders. Women earning the same wage as men, men having the right to their children in a divorce, male rape victims, whatever unequal problems genders face.

Sadly the loudest of the group are the idiots that make us all look bad. Of course that's how it is with all groups, so . . .
Reply
:iconblamethe1st:
BlameThe1st Featured By Owner Feb 8, 2013  Hobbyist General Artist
Well then "feminist" would be somewhat of a misleading name, then, since "feminine" implies "women" and thus only focusing only on rights for women. Why not a name like "egalitarian"?
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
February 7, 2013
Image Size
1.3 KB
Resolution
99×57
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
2,636 (1 today)
Favourites
79 (who?)
Comments
107
Downloads
5
×