lol thought this pic parodied feminism well(Women only pls)

First things first: It's "ace in the hole".
Now, onto more important issues: A woman can both belong to herself and still give herself to another. You should never lose yourself in someone else, or what is left? A shadow of self? A sad image of what you think your partner wants? That's not right. That's not a healthy relationship. It's just sad.

Should mention OP is also a big fan of Twilight as a model for ideal relationships.....

This isn't about food or burgers

To be honest, it isn't really about feminism either...

But hasn't the fat acceptance movement primarily focused on a feminist model of patriarchal oppression of fat women? --most clearly represented by the encouragement of women to diet??? I implore you to be reasonable!!

First of all, your photo is not an analogy for fat acceptance, it' s an analogy for accepting real. Fat is real but isn't exactly something that should be accepted. The "Real Women" movement is about accepting an obtainable standard for women for who they are, not their appearence. The women represented in these photos aren't necessarily fat. They are ususally of healthy BF% and BMI. Furthermore it isn't even fully about the the fact that the women presented by media are unobtainable standards of beauty as mush as what is their beauty? Their beauty is an altered image of an already asthetically pleasing view. That is what is being represented as beauty. While the opposing side is saying that the stretch marks from pregnancy are what make a woman beautiful. Women who do and accomplish amazing things. That is what makes them beautiful. Their kind heart, the dedication. Not their flawless skin and abs.

The movement isn't about fat acceptance and fat shaming. It is about what we look for to define beauty. Superficial falsified perfection? Or women who strive to do amazing things?

That's how I perceive it anyway.

It's not about dieting or not dieting. It's being healthy and how we should have women who do great things to look up to. not women who surgically alter their body for acceptance of physic without anything substantial to idolize. I don't care about what people look like, I care about who people are. As a woman, I want real women who do great things for my future daughter to look up to. Not flawlessly beautiful women who are only flawless because of make up artists, personal trainers and chefs, and photoshop who could care less about the meanings of their actions or what they represent, as long as they are pretty. Give me a scientist, give me philanthropist, a teacher or a mother. Don't give me someone who binges and purges, who needs acceptance of her physical self because that is temporary. What should matter is being the best that you can be. Being healthy goes along with that. Being healthy doesn't necessarily mean abs and size 2 pants. Physical appearance should be a non issue.

I think you're pointing right at the issue without realizing it.

That hamburger is an object. It is one dimensional.

Women are subjects. When you compare the images in the media with images of real women, you're treating them as objects or one-dimensional things. The thing that makes the "real woman" beautiful isn't that she's more aesthetically pleasing, it's that she's not an object. The "real woman" is a subject with a multi-dimesional personality and life. Her looks reflect the life she's lived and her experiences.

The hamburger exists for your pleasure and enjoyment. The woman belongs to herself and her appearance is not for you.

Which brings me back to this ace in the whole I have been waiting to trap you all with since page one ^

You belong to you, you don't belong to me. Since the essence of love is giving yourself to someone, the essence of the romance, you make yourself unlikable, unlovable, due to your insecurity. Giving yourself like that to a man is the only reason for him to sacrifice his life. And if you are too stubborn, proud, empowered to do that, you destroy the potential for love to thrive therefore destroying the family unit.

This comes back full circle to how the burger is self destructive. You just destroyed our marriage with your self centered feminist behavior, therefore making divorce statistics skyrocket in the last decade. AKA detrimental/destructive to society.

Checkmate.

Why would you want either burger? They look cheap, cheesy and greasy.
Why eat them when you can have a tuna roll?

Because a tuna roll isn't a burger?

Good burgers ARE cheap, cheesy, and greasy.

First things first: It's "ace in the hole".
Now, onto more important issues: A woman can both belong to herself and still give herself to another. You should never lose yourself in someone else, or what is left? A shadow of self? A sad image of what you think your partner wants? That's not right. That's not a healthy relationship. It's just sad.

Should mention OP is also a big fan of Twilight as a model for ideal relationships.....

Noooooooo!!!! Whyyyyyyyyy??!?!!!

... removed a bunch of drivel...

You just destroyed our marriage with your self centered chauvinistic behavior, therefore making divorce statistics skyrocket in the last decade. AKA detrimental/destructive to society.

Checkmate.

I think you're pointing right at the issue without realizing it.

That hamburger is an object. It is one dimensional.

Women are subjects. When you compare the images in the media with images of real women, you're treating them as objects or one-dimensional things. The thing that makes the "real woman" beautiful isn't that she's more aesthetically pleasing, it's that she's not an object. The "real woman" is a subject with a multi-dimesional personality and life. Her looks reflect the life she's lived and her experiences.

The hamburger exists for your pleasure and enjoyment. The woman belongs to herself and her appearance is not for you.

Which brings me back to this ace in the whole I have been waiting to trap you all with since page one ^

You belong to you, you don't belong to me. Since the essence of love is giving yourself to someone, the essence of the romance, you make yourself unlikable, unlovable, due to your insecurity. Giving yourself like that to a man is the only reason for him to sacrifice his life. And if you are too stubborn, proud, empowered to do that, you destroy the potential for love to thrive therefore destroying the family unit.

This comes back full circle to how the burger is self destructive. You just destroyed our marriage with your self centered feminist behavior, therefore making divorce statistics skyrocket in the last decade. AKA detrimental/destructive to society.

Checkmate.

No. The essence of romance is NOT giving yourself to the other person. Have you ever been in a successful long term relationship? In a relationship you still belong to yourself, you just share your life with someone else, your life, not your self. I love my husband. We share our lives, our home, our money, our children, most of our free time, our future, our families, etc. But my life does not belong to him. I consult him on major decisions but they are still mine to make. He has his own life, hobbies, friends. He makes his decisions. He doesn't control me, I don't control him. If all we had was each other, we'd probably murder each other.

Thats not love. Feminism is a cancer to true love.

You don't know what true love is.

I know what its like and its way more passionate than anything you could imagine. You're not even in love you're in a partnership.

I think you're pointing right at the issue without realizing it.

That hamburger is an object. It is one dimensional.

Women are subjects. When you compare the images in the media with images of real women, you're treating them as objects or one-dimensional things. The thing that makes the "real woman" beautiful isn't that she's more aesthetically pleasing, it's that she's not an object. The "real woman" is a subject with a multi-dimesional personality and life. Her looks reflect the life she's lived and her experiences.

The hamburger exists for your pleasure and enjoyment. The woman belongs to herself and her appearance is not for you.

Which brings me back to this ace in the whole I have been waiting to trap you all with since page one ^

You belong to you, you don't belong to me. Since the essence of love is giving yourself to someone, the essence of the romance, you make yourself unlikable, unlovable, due to your insecurity. Giving yourself like that to a man is the only reason for him to sacrifice his life. And if you are too stubborn, proud, empowered to do that, you destroy the potential for love to thrive therefore destroying the family unit.

This comes back full circle to how the burger is self destructive. You just destroyed our marriage with your self centered feminist behavior, therefore making divorce statistics skyrocket in the last decade. AKA detrimental/destructive to society.

Checkmate.

No. The essence of romance is NOT giving yourself to the other person. Have you ever been in a successful long term relationship? In a relationship you still belong to yourself, you just share your life with someone else, your life, not your self. I love my husband. We share our lives, our home, our money, our children, most of our free time, our future, our families, etc. But my life does not belong to him. I consult him on major decisions but they are still mine to make. He has his own life, hobbies, friends. He makes his decisions. He doesn't control me, I don't control him. If all we had was each other, we'd probably murder each other.

Thats not love. Feminism is a cancer to true love.

You don't know what true love is.

I know what its like and its way more passionate than anything you could imagine. You're not even in love you're in a partnership.

you cannot be in love with your hand, no matter how giving it is.

just saying.

Its a bit disturbing to feel out how many people seem to not even acknowledge the idea that feminism is detrimental to society.

Its like the idea that its possible is not even on your radar which is quite appalling to consider the chaotic irresponsibility of it all.

yes... yes indeed.

us weak females need you big strong manly men to protect us and save us and kill our spiders. but only if you are ripped and have sexy bodies. Because that is the only way we can know that you are happy and fulfilled.




no really... I DO need someone to kill my spiders.





All funning aside... I like being strong, powerful, self-sufficient.. because then I can pick the man I want to be with for the man he is, and not for what he can provide for me. I am with who I am with because I WANT to be. Not because I HAVE to be.

Maybe that is what scares the OP.

Which is why you are more likely to be divorced, men want to be needed. If you makes us feel insecure you will divorce my *kitten*.

Fify