What's Your Opinion On Feminism?

[SilentLoner]

 

 

 

No, a new name is not needed. The reason why is that the people who crusade against feminism now will do the same to the new label, because for most if not all of those people, raging at feminism is a safe cover for their sentiments against women in general.

 

 

Uh . . . no, no, no and no.  If Feminism was just a synonym for equality then we wouldn't even use the word Feminism.

 

Yes yes and yes actually. You understand very little, if anything, about feminism.

 

The illogical, nonsensical and divisive ideology is really holding equality back.

 

The ignorance about feminism in this forum sometimes could rival that of a fundie church.

 

Anyways, I'm out of here before this thread goes the usual way and shows that you don't need religion to be an ignoramus.

[florduh]

Opinion on feminism? Same as my opinion would be formed on religion, art, music and pets. What, exactly, are you referring to? It makes a difference. By religion would we mean Fred Phelps or the Dalai Lama? Would art be Matisse or Oglethorpe? Music could mean to you anything from Beethoven to Chris Brown. By pets are we talking about pit bulls or bunnies?

 

As with so many simple terms (such as "atheist") the simple, clear dictionary definition isn't what most people go by these days. Is the "feminism" of which you speak that of Amazon feminism, cultural feminism, feminazism or something in between those styles?

[mymistake]

 

 

 

 

No, a new name is not needed. The reason why is that the people who crusade against feminism now will do the same to the new label, because for most if not all of those people, raging at feminism is a safe cover for their sentiments against women in general.

 

 

Uh . . . no, no, no and no.  If Feminism was just a synonym for equality then we wouldn't even use the word Feminism.

 

Yes yes and yes actually. You understand very little, if anything, about feminism.

 

The illogical, nonsensical and divisive ideology is really holding equality back.

 

The ignorance about feminism in this forum sometimes could rival that of a fundie church.

 

Anyways, I'm out of here before this thread goes the usual way and shows that you don't need religion to be an ignoramus.

 

 

 

Call names and leave.  How typical.

 

If everyone who wants equality is a feminist then I am a feminist by definition.  You can't have that as your standard and then abandon it when flip flopping is convenient.

 

If everyone who wants equality is a feminist then there are a great mass of feminists who are disenfranchised.  They don't like being treated like a rapist, a pervert, a creep, a hater, an oppressor, an ignoramus, and so on just because they were born male.  So what you wind up with is millions of people who might have helped but now can't be bothered because they were chased away.  Suggesting ways to reach the goal of equality is not a cover for sentiments against women.

[NoOne]

Hey everyone, take it easy. I'm seeing some tension here. It's okay to have different opinions, that's actually why I created the thread. I wanted to see the different viewpoints. I'm loving the emotion and honesty, but please don't get upset.

I mean even if you don't like the label "feminist"or if you don't like modern-day American feminism (or just feminism in general), I'm pretty sure everyone can agree that women should be equal to men. That's the one thing I'm getting from this.

[Bhim]

DG I have to say you take a very rational approach to what many treat as an emotionally charged issue. If more people (mostly feminists I think, but also a few on the other side of the fence) could do the same, I think the national dialog on women's issues would be a lot more productive.

[Thurisaz]

Make that "global" dialog actually

DG, some time ago we had a shitload of threads more or less connected to feminism, that's why there's palpable tension here with some people.

 

And as for SL...

 

...Gee I'm soooo surprised about you pulling your usual thing. I'm pretty sure I challenged you to a certain something some time ago... if I'm wrong please consider this the challenge. That website of yours you so love, you know, jezebel... point me to an article there that doesn't more or less clearly paint all men with the broad brush of "sexists", "misogynists" et cetera. I've checked out that site in detail twice, some time ago, and all I found was one half-sentence in one article saying "of course not all men are evil"... before that very same article immediately went back to bashing all men.

 

(for good measure, let's imagine for a moment what would happen if I, or any other man in here actually, would openly claim something like "(all) women are golddiggers/liars/(insert your insult here)!"... can you hear the - justified! - uproar already?)

 

Quite ironic how you confirm what we're complaining about while claiming that we're wrong, no? Gee what does that remind me of... could it be something we all on this site know because it drove most of us to join here?

 

By the way, I also haven't forgotten the personal insults you hurled at me in private message after I took lots of time to explain my point of view in detail. Someone here indeed seems unwilling to even consider another point of view, but somehow I don't think it's me.

 

And that will be all hostility that I'll post in this thread, unless more unsubstantiated "all men are evil" claims or similar are made. Back to reasonable discussion please.

 

(Sorry all, I quite literally couldn't resist... mea culpa)

[Bhim]

Thurisaz, I can't help but think that what you're experiencing might be precisely the problem of emotion which plagues any discussion of this issue.  When attempting to discuss feminism with a certain subset of feminist women, I find that emotional responses replace rational dialog.  And I won't attempt to be politically correct about such an important issue as this: this subset comprises most of the feminist women I've encountered.  Often times when I try to either open a discussion about feminism or respond to comments a feminist makes on the topic, I'm met with an outburst of crying, anger, and what seems to be a passive way of saying "I am a victim of some kind of sexual violence, and even speaking to me about this topic causes me to relive it."

 

This is absolutely unacceptable behavior.  I respect women by treating them the same as I do men; I do not hold to the stereotype that women are irrational and ruled by emotion.  This posture is why I feel that women are entitled to a seat at the table of dialog on public policy issues to the same extent as men.  If a particular person, male or female, treats this issue with emotion rather than rational debate, then as far as I am concerned that person has proved him/herself incompetent to express an opinion on this topic, and I don't particularly care what they have to say.

 

In a society ruled by law and order, victims cannot pass judgments.  When a person steals, he is found guilty by a judge, not by the person from whom he stole.  The aggrieved party harbors far to strong a bias to pass the appropriate sentence.  If the feminist would have her views implemented as public policy, then she must not portray herself as a victim of male power or violence.  I don't want to make any comments specifically about SilentLoner, as there seems to be a lot of history here that I don't know.  But in general I don't appreciate hit-and-run tactics.  A person interested in rational dialog ought not make comments on a topic and then refuse to hear the opposition.  Even evangelicals get their voices heard on this forum.  It's said that decisions are made by those who show up.  A person who won't sit down at the table of public policy debate isn't entitled to a vote on how society is run.

[Thurisaz]

Yup that may very well be a good explanation Bhim. Though of course no position will ever be correct for literally everyone with an issue as complex as this one.

[Guest Furball]

i'm late to this topic, i apologize. i am all for equality. i would love to see and would vote for a woman as the next president.

[NoOne]

DG I have to say you take a very rational approach to what many treat as an emotionally charged issue. If more people (mostly feminists I think, but also a few on the other side of the fence) could do the same, I think the national dialog on women's issues would be a lot more productive.

Well, thank you! I try to keep discussion as objective and logical as possible. Once you start bringing a ton of emotion or personal belief into it, things get messy and untruthful. I think your opinions are pretty interesting and really productive in this discussion

I kind of feel like some feminists act like some Christians or overly-devout liberals...you challenge or disagree with anything they say, they resort to manipulation, strawmans, and ad hominems. That's dishonest and it defeats your cause. And for people who complain about being stereotyped, a lot of them sure create it or at least prove them to be true. I think the biggest problem I have with American feminists is the way they complain about oppression but do nothing to actually help out the women in the East who are being oppressed. The truly oppressed have no representation or actual aid because we're picking at straws here. Female characters in video games are too feminine? Some women can't drive or get justice against their rapist in other parts of the world but anyway...

[mymistake]

The truly oppressed have no representation or actual aid because we're picking at straws here. Female characters in video games are too feminine? Some women can't drive or get justice against their rapist in other parts of the world but anyway...

 

 

 

Now you are getting at something very important.  What can average people in the West do to help oppressed women in the Middle East, Asia and Africa?  I think our culture is slowly having an influence.  Progressive ideas are being spread by the internet into very repressed areas.  We have recently seen several times when a ME government threatened to punish  someone in the most barbaric circumstances and international pressure put a stop to it.  I just wish there was more we could do to speed up the process.

[Wertbag]

I've wondered what percentage of women make the choice to be a mother in favour of focusing on a career?  If you have made this choice you most likely wouldn't be able to return to work full time until your child is school age and of course most families have several children.

Of course there is nothing wrong with making this choice but if a percentage of women are taking themselves out of the working world for an extended period of time, then surely there are always going to be more men applying for high level jobs?

[Bhim]

I've wondered what percentage of women make the choice to be a mother in favour of focusing on a career? If you have made this choice you most likely wouldn't be able to return to work full time until your child is school age and of course most families have several children.

Of course there is nothing wrong with making this choice but if a percentage of women are taking themselves out of the working world for an extended period of time, then surely there are always going to be more men applying for high level jobs?

I can add but one data point here. My wife has a job and is quite focused on her own career, but we have decided that she will quit all career pursuits and stay home, should we have any kids. I'm actually the one else who's not so interested in this, mostly because I like having money, and can satisfy my own paternal instincts by playing with my friends' kids.

 

Gender issues in a non-Christian environment is quite interesting. We don't talk at all about male power, sexism, etc. It's almost as though these concerns are imposed by Christian culture and are not relevant to a non-Christian couple such as ourselves. To us it's as simple as agreeing that any hypothetical children would be best served by having their mom at home, and that breadwinning is a responsibility rather than a privilege.

 

Another great thing about neither of us being Christian is that I feel no compulsion to convince anyone else to adopt my way of life.

[Leo]

Ok I've read quite a few but not all the posts on here.

 

Here's what I think: Obviously I support women's equality, but the fact that we have to say this will kind of demonstrate what I'm saying.

 

Someone called feminism "a cult". I don't know if it is or it isn't. But the body of literature and some famous professors have supported women taking action against any man, because they have had action taken against them. So, in short, just like the white lynch mobs in the South before the 60s, find something or someone that looks sort of like an offender, any offender, and exercise your God-given, or university-given, right to bring about mob justice. Nothing is more destructive to a society than this kind of mob mentality. Religions have been very successful at using it, I've seen Christians do it. Feminists of that ilk are technically no different. We have the original sin of being born male (which is also said to be a social construct), some have the original sin of being born white.

 

Any societal system where someone can be entrapped against their will and automatically painted as 'the bad guy', names getting called or worse, is obviously really bankrupt. I'll give you an example from Christianity: We were in the church lobby, a guy came and asked me about some rare birds in his yard, since I'm a bird guy. I mentioned as part of the explanation, that due to climate change, migration patterns for birds have been erratic based on weather conditions and food sources. Quite a normal conversation, if not that normal for inside of a church lobby. On the way home, however, the Wife told me someone had been really upset and taken Her aside, asking why I was a liberal who supports climate change? Now climate change and its effects is a really complicated issue. But there I was, entrapped, someone else's ideology decided to write my narrative.

 

I really hate this as a man. I have a wife, a daughter. But because I'm in the software business, and my daughter wants to follow a path in the social work area, I'm a misogynist because I clearly must not have encouraged her enough to be in technology. Never mind that I gave her circuit boards to play with as a kid, and had her visit the hardware department of my company, headed by a woman, during Take Your Daughter to Work Day. But because the narrative states that man equals misogynist, and also states that the only reason a woman could ever possibly consider anything but technology as a profession is misogyny, that makes me a misogynist. It reminds me of the creationist arguments from my youth in the 1980s. It's all ideology, all narrative, and people with ideology and narrative first are just looking to complete that narrative. I have a lot of respect for women like Christina Hoff Sommers and Karen Straughan, precisely because they don't do this. I can disagree with Karen Straughan re: her opinions on the situation for women in the middle east, for instance, and yet not be automatically entrapped into a position of failure or original sin. Entrapment is a terrible place to be, because now you're not only guilty by birth and / or association, but now you're guilty of all the crimes that are part of your accuser's narrative. And everyone wants to be in on the jump: that currency of victimhood. It's as terrifying for me to witness as when I witnessed a fight between some stray dogs as a kid. So yes, these expressions of feminism which have a narrative and fit everyone into it, waylaying and entrapping, is clearly cultlike in structure. Consider Sam Harris's response post, <a href="http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/im-not-the-sexist-pig-youre-looking-for">I'm not the sexist pig you're looking for.</a>

He explains how he's really not intentionally sexist at all. The only thing his accuser had to argue with is the same argument we ex-Christians are all familiar with: "You're just too sexist to see just how sexist you are!" "You're just too sinful to realize just how sinful you really are!" Religion and totalitarian regimes are the only places where we see accusations of thought crimes. Thhis brand of feminism ™ is clearly one of the two, though I don't know which.

 

That being said, of course I know that "not all feminists are like that." Are you prepared to say that of Christians? Christianity also entraps people, creates a feeling of self-flagellation, a feeling of perpetual failure from birth, a narrative about moral defect based upon biology. Perhaps the greatest way I differ from many feminists? You will never see me out talking about how blind people 100 years ago were lucky to get any job or any money, and the bet they could usually hope for was a job tying brooms. you'll never find me out trying to get people who can see to self-flagellate and apologize to me for crimes committed by others, or by people and to people who lived and died before either of us were even born yet. And when I do face things in life that relate to my personal physical disability, if you didn't cause it, I'm not going to go stick it to you like a southern white lyncher of the 1920s, or a radical feminist of 2015. Your eyesight is not a "defective sense," you're not suffering "light poisoning," and eyes are not "symbols of power" to be broken down. If you think what I just said was redundant and silly? That's what radical feminism would look like if they were all blind, and instead of focusing on genitalia, chromosomes and hormones, they focused upon whose eyes happened to work or not.

 

I will say one thing re: privilege. Most of that discussion just plays into the currency of victimhood and is useful for ad hominem attacks to shut others down. Check your privilege this. You can't say that. Why didn't you mention those? On the other side, I met a woman last year distributing green bags where we could take one, become a regular participant filling the bags with food and necessities for the one in six Americans who go hungry. Statistically, that would mean some of you. Now, I'm "privileged" because I can afford more food than I need. However, there was no entrapment, nor was there a mob or a narrative, just a way to do something useful and constructive for the community. Call me whatever you want, hell even a misogynist or a heathen: I'm far more interested in doing something constructive than just sitting around blaming myself and blaming other people for things.

[Orbit]

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

[Leo]

I'll say one thing to Bhim: In our case, the reason She stayed home and I worked was because they don't pay early childhood educators as well as they pay even lower-paid software developers like me. I have also been privileged, to use that p word, to work in a business where, when I did take a sick day for the daughter's benefit, I could still work from home. I've been telecommuting for 8 years running full time now.

 

Being the only earner is definitely a responsibility and not a privilege. If anything messes up, you've blown it for your entire family. And if you stay late, you stand a better chance of providing better for them. If yu stay late, you are abducating your responsibilities at home. This is seriously not gender specific at all, despite what those who trade in victimhood currency may claim. I wasn't the only one, plenty of my friends who are also dads have dealt with this. It's a human problem if you're the only one outside the home making money. I'll leave the "who has it harder" silliness to the children, however, and not enter into that. But it is tough, laugistically, however you do it. I knew two parent households, both earners, who would tell me, "Leo, after we pay for daycare, extra medications for the kids getting sick more often, and other related expenses, we're usually left not that much better off." Of course, this would be different without kids at home, as it is for us now, or for people who both earn significantly more than She or I do now.

[RedStar]

 

 

Obviously no one supports rape, so this seemed reasonable to me.  And then someone wrote this:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/06/no-matter-what-jackie-said-we-should-automatically-believe-rape-claims/

 

The tl;dr is as follows: for the particular crime of rape we should suspend the American ethic of "innocent until proven guilty." To be fair the author (who is a trained lawyer) makes it clear that she is not making a legal argument about how the courts should operate, but rather she is addressing how she believes society should operate outside the courts.  This is almost worse, because she suggests that society judge people without so much as a trial.  I have always believed in Blackstone's formulation that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.  This opinion piece, and many others like it, turn that maxim on its head.  Christian politicians have done much to ruin America, and I have not once considered moving to another country. However if this philosophy ever became law, I would. I cannot live in a country where the judicial system is not heavily biased in favor of the accused, regardless of the seriousness of the crime with which he is accused. And it is feminism which is opposing precisely this view.

 

I agree with you 100%

 

I'm a logical thinker, no matter what a claim is about or who is making it, the burden of proof is on whoever is making the positive claim. That should not change simply because it's a difficult or emotional issue. Emotions should never be the basis for believing a claim. I'm disgusted that a lawyer would hold the position that a person should be considered guilty until proven innocent it's flawed logic and it's wrong. We don't live in a world where every claim made is truthful, people can and do lie about things for various reasons. I've seen people who claim to be skeptics, logical thinkers etc who fall into believing claims without evidence and honestly, it frustrates me. If a person is going to call themselves a logic thinker, they need to be consistent with it, throwing away sound logic when it's not convenient is hypocritical. In cases like rape, unless there is video footage of an entire encounter between parties, how is the accused supposed to prove a negative?

 

This doesn't mean that anyone making claims should be treated as though they're liars, this is something that must be dealt with very carefully. Investigation is extremely important, finding as much evidence as possible that can help prove or disprove a claim is a must. In the court of public opinion, conclusions are often made about the accused before they've gone anywhere near a court room. Sometimes something can look convincing but then new evidence can turn everything on its head which is one reason why I like to exercise extreme caution about what my opinions on such matters are. There's often much more to a case than what's reported about it, and sometimes media will pick sides depending on what they think will generate the most interest therefore the most income for them, at the end of the day, they're a business.

 

I actually enjoy studying court cases, you can find a lot of information in documents that either hasn't been reported or has been inaccurately reported which is a major reason why I'm so careful these days about my conclusions. Reading about people who have been exonerated by DNA evidence is sad, some people spent decades behind bars for crimes they didn't commit before the real perpetrator was found. A person can never be given back the time that was taken from them and there can still be people who will think they're guilty no matter what, the damage done to a wrongfully accused or convicted person can never be totally undone.

 

Sometimes people get angry with me for not jumping on the bandwagon of judging a person guilty but I won't compromise on good logic or fairness. 

[mymistake]

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

[Orbit]

 

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

 

Your response shows me that you have had bad experiences with certain women. Feminism is a movement that transcends those experiences. I already tried starting a thread with the actual scholarship on feminist issues, but it was denied in the same way as putting geological facts in front of a creationist. I'm not going there again, it's a waste of energy.

[mymistake]

 

 

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

 

Your response shows me that you have had bad experiences with certain women. Feminism is a movement that transcends those experiences. I already tried starting a thread with the actual scholarship on feminist issues, but it was denied in the same way as putting geological facts in front of a creationist. I'm not going there again, it's a waste of energy.

 

 

 

Yes I have had some bad experience with women.  I had one just a few days ago on Feb 22nd when I was called an ignoramus for trying to help in the Equality movement.  From my perspective Feminism does not transcend these events.  Rather it is being held back by them.  Why am I constantly chased away from Feminism if everybody who wants equality is a Feminist?

[Orbit]

 

 

 

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

 

Your response shows me that you have had bad experiences with certain women. Feminism is a movement that transcends those experiences. I already tried starting a thread with the actual scholarship on feminist issues, but it was denied in the same way as putting geological facts in front of a creationist. I'm not going there again, it's a waste of energy.

 

 

 

Yes I have had some bad experience with women.  I had one just a few days ago on Feb 22nd when I was called an ignoramus for trying to help in the Equality movement.  From my perspective Feminism does not transcend these events.  Rather it is being held back by them.  Why am I constantly chased away from Feminism if everybody who wants equality is a Feminist?

 

Don't let my graduate study on the feminist movement's history, philosophy, and politics get in the way of your personal experience. Because clearly a global movement is trumped by it.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

 

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

 

Your response shows me that you have had bad experiences with certain women. Feminism is a movement that transcends those experiences. I already tried starting a thread with the actual scholarship on feminist issues, but it was denied in the same way as putting geological facts in front of a creationist. I'm not going there again, it's a waste of energy.

 

 

 

Yes I have had some bad experience with women.  I had one just a few days ago on Feb 22nd when I was called an ignoramus for trying to help in the Equality movement.  From my perspective Feminism does not transcend these events.  Rather it is being held back by them.  Why am I constantly chased away from Feminism if everybody who wants equality is a Feminist?

 

Don't let my graduate study on the feminist movement's history, philosophy, and politics get in the way of your personal experience. Because clearly a global movement is trumped by it.

 

 

I didn't say that.  You know I didn't imply that.

 

In post 40 you said we were talking ignorance.  I provided examples.  Do my examples not demonstrate that my experience happened?

 

For the record I am not concerned about a "professional victim".  I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion.

[Orbit]

 

 

 

 

 

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

 

Your response shows me that you have had bad experiences with certain women. Feminism is a movement that transcends those experiences. I already tried starting a thread with the actual scholarship on feminist issues, but it was denied in the same way as putting geological facts in front of a creationist. I'm not going there again, it's a waste of energy.

 

 

 

Yes I have had some bad experience with women.  I had one just a few days ago on Feb 22nd when I was called an ignoramus for trying to help in the Equality movement.  From my perspective Feminism does not transcend these events.  Rather it is being held back by them.  Why am I constantly chased away from Feminism if everybody who wants equality is a Feminist?

 

Don't let my graduate study on the feminist movement's history, philosophy, and politics get in the way of your personal experience. Because clearly a global movement is trumped by it.

 

 

I didn't say that.  You know I didn't imply that.

 

In post 40 you said we were talking ignorance.  I provided examples.  Do my examples not demonstrate that my experience happened?

 

For the record I am not concerned about a "professional victim".  I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion.

 

Ignorance of the feminist movement, its history, goals, and accomplishments is what I was referring to.

[mymistake]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Much of this "discussion" of feminism is based on ignorance, "impressions", and familiar stereotypes of feminism. I am an academic feminist and have yet to meet the man-hating professional victim that you're all so concerned about. But don't let that get in the way of your stereotypes. Carry on.

 

 

Can you explain post #7?  Those who do not like the name are on a crusade because they are hiding their hate for women.  Does that strike you as reasonable?

 

What about last year when a third party publicly accused me of supporting rape?  And why would some people upvote those accusations?

 

Before your time I was the favorite punching bag of a certain female poster.  You can look at the archives to see what I had to endure.

 

While I don't have home movies my aunt is not a stereotype.  Ever since I was a child she informed me that I hate women and I can't help it because I am male.  Even back then the idea stuck me as absurd but to my aunt denying it was only proof that it was true.  She still pulls that card on me whenever we disagree about anything.

 

But I just have to put up with all of this because I am male.  I should keep it to myself because mentioning it is ignorance.

 

Your response shows me that you have had bad experiences with certain women. Feminism is a movement that transcends those experiences. I already tried starting a thread with the actual scholarship on feminist issues, but it was denied in the same way as putting geological facts in front of a creationist. I'm not going there again, it's a waste of energy.

 

 

 

Yes I have had some bad experience with women.  I had one just a few days ago on Feb 22nd when I was called an ignoramus for trying to help in the Equality movement.  From my perspective Feminism does not transcend these events.  Rather it is being held back by them.  Why am I constantly chased away from Feminism if everybody who wants equality is a Feminist?

 

Don't let my graduate study on the feminist movement's history, philosophy, and politics get in the way of your personal experience. Because clearly a global movement is trumped by it.

 

 

I didn't say that.  You know I didn't imply that.

 

In post 40 you said we were talking ignorance.  I provided examples.  Do my examples not demonstrate that my experience happened?

 

For the record I am not concerned about a "professional victim".  I'm trying to have a reasonable discussion.

 

Ignorance of the feminist movement, its history, goals, and accomplishments is what I was referring to.

 

 

 

Well just off the cuff it began a couple of centuries ago.  I've seen the black and white pics of women demonstrating.  In the early days they wanted to vote and eventually they got it through an amendment.  (I don't remember which one without looking it up.)  After that they began lobbying to have the more sexist laws removed from the books - including barbaric things like a husband being allowed to beat his wife with a stick as long as it was thiner than his thumb.  Then they lobbied to have marital rape and domestic violence criminalized.  I suppose they had to fight to make it into the workforce in the early 20th century because when WWII kicked off there were already a significant number of women working.  But the pay and available fields were highly restricted based on gender.  The war was an event when women were allowed to move into roles that up to that point had been reserved for men.  When the war ended Feminists fought to stay in those roles and not go back to the previous restrictions.  Then Feminism lobbied for equal pay.  Wasn't it around the 60's when they were able to get minimum wage equalized for gender and women started breaking the glass ceilings.  They made inroads into leadership positions and began to be elected in higher numbers.  These days you never hear the phrase "the first woman to" as a current event.  Domestic violence began to be viewed as not normal by society as a whole.  And then there was a shift when men started going to jail for beating their wives.  Feminism started to influence movies and television as well.  Having a hero date rape a woman slowly became unacceptable.  Characters in the story gradually stopped being there simply as romantic interests and started to become part of the plot.  Female protagonists eventually became normalized such as Kim Possible.  Compare the female characters of Frozen to those of Sleeping Beauty.  Today there is still a bias for many in the business world will assume a candidate is smarter simply because he his male and so on.

 

How is that for a summary without looking anything up?  But what does any of that have to do with our current discussion?  When males are met with hostility for no apparent reason this does not motivate them to help.

[mymistake]

*of course Pelosi was one of the last ones to be a "first woman to".  That was a recent current event and the big one is still waiting to happen.  But most of these "first women" have already happened.  There are very few places left in the US where a woman can't go.  I was trying to contrast this with how often we heard the phrase back in the 70's.  Of course if we go back to the moon it would be normal for a woman to be on the crew.  There hasn't been a woman Chief Justice, Senate Majority Leader or (I think) a four star general yet.  But those things won't be too far off and when they happen it will seem just as natural as when Pelosi made history.