# Anti-Feminism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 17, 2015, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390 "2015-07-17T06:05:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/201 "2015-07-19T22:49:25Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > On the other hand, if all men suddenly disappeared, women would find themselves in a different world from the one they currently live in. One without truckers or farmers or ranchers or miners or plumbers or sanitation workers or garbage men or engineers. Considering that many women get freaked out by the sight of a roach, I think they’d get pretty unhappy pretty soon, once the lights went out, their toilets stopped working, and the stuff at the grocery store disappeared. Are you trying to lose your own debate by making people laugh at you? These comments are utterly stupid. Women are already doing every one of the tasks that you imply only men will do. As to being freaked out by a roach, you can get most guys to faint by putting them in the same room as a dirty diaper, much less asking them to change one.\* - I am aware that a very large number of fathers change their babies’ diapers, but if we have to rely on dumb stereotypes to argue this thread, then all dumb stereotypes are fair game. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/202 "2015-07-19T22:49:55Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > That’s ridiculous. People don’t donate based on what they think is worst. They donate based on what they have an emotional connection to. Most people have an emotional connection to breast cancer because most people know someone with (and have likely lost someone to) breast cancer. Really? People don’t know someone or have lost someone to lung cancer, prostate cancer, brain cancer, heart disease, bone cancer, liver cancer…? Here are the top 10 causes of death, [according to the CDC](http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/leading-causes-of-death.htm): Heart disease: 611,105 Cancer: 584,881 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 149,205 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 130,557 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,978 Alzheimer’s disease: 84,767 Diabetes: 75,578 Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,979 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 47,112 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 41,149 According to [breast cancer.org](http://www.breastcancer.org/symptoms/understand_bc/statistics), the number for breast cancer is 40,290. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/203 "2015-07-19T22:52:13Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Perhaps the following: identification of all the genesets responsible for high and low intelligence, and a detailed analysis to compare the presence of these various genesets in individuals and their IQ test scores which shows a positive correlation that is entirely unaffected by categories like race, ethnicity, gender, etc.; such that two individuals with the same genesets for intelligence will score very similarly on these tests. This is just an aside but that isn’t a reasonable request for anything other than theories that specify genetics and that isn’t the case with IQ tests. It also isn’t the case for the vast majority of medical and other behavioral tests either. It is easy to imagine (because it is done all the time by scouting agents) that someone could invent a comprehensive test of overall athletic performance that has a strong positive correlation with performance in many different sporting skills. The subtests would be things like sprint performance, reaction time, jumping ability, long distance running ability, throwing accuracy and other distinct abilities that may make up a significant portion of something that can be called ‘general athletic ability’. Coaches and teams that use this selection tool see greatly increased performance overall from their picks when they use this new test as part of the selection criteria. Would you think that was controversial? This test doesn’t even attempt to explain how or why the results are what they are let alone delve into the genetic realm for a full explanation because that isn’t what it is for. Its job is to be able to predict performance on other complex tasks and it does it as well as possible based on the complex and sophisticated statistics behind it. However, it doesn’t even attempt to tell you which athletes are going to perform much worse than expected because they have personal issues, poor work ethic or just a nasty disposition. It also won’t tell you which ones will overperform because they have a tenacious work ethic or some other unusual factor but none of that is what it was designed for. IQ tests are exactly the same as this fictional test of athletic performance that I just described. They are only interested in measuring certain broad traits at a the behavioral level and the root biological or genetic reasons for it are not of concern at least for most clinical and practical applications. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/204 "2015-07-19T22:55:29Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > IQ tests are exactly the same as this fictional test of athletic performance that I just described. They are only interested in measuring certain broad traits at a behavioral and demonstrable level and the root biological or genetic reasons for it are not of concern at least for for clinical and practical applications. Intelligence seems to me to be orders-of-magnitude more complex than athletic ability. And as to all the other factors (“personal issues, poor work ethic”, etc.), they could very well include societal and cultural factors which could be indications that the tests are not entirely objective and unbiased with regards to categories like ethnicity, gender, race, etc. But I think IQ test validity is a bit of a hijack for this thread, so perhaps we shouldn’t continue in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/205 "2015-07-19T23:20:30Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > The point was that breast cancer gets more attention than other kinds of cancer, not because it’s the worst kind of cancer, but because it mainly affects women. Breast cancer gets so much attention because it’s a common form of cancer and (perhaps more importantly) Susan G. Komen is really good at promoting itself. Ovarian, uterine, and cervical cancer don’t get anywhere near that level of attention despite being cancers that only affect women. They do admittedly get more attention than the ending of _Titanic_, so I guess there’s that. Diseases that kill real women today are taken more seriously than the deaths of fictional men in movies from nearly 20 years ago. But if you expect me to share your outrage about that then I’m afraid you’re going to be disappointed. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/206 "2015-07-19T23:24:45Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > Indeed. But our poor OP has obviously been damaged by _something_ that turned him weird & bitter. Just as there are misogynistic gay men, there are misogynistic straight men who have sex with women. There is no external cause for their misogyny. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/207 "2015-07-19T23:41:21Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > It is easy to imagine (because it is done all the time by scouting agents) that someone could invent a comprehensive test of overall athletic performance that has a strong positive correlation with performance in many different sporting skills. The subtests would be things like sprint performance, reaction time, jumping ability, long distance running ability, throwing accuracy and other distinct abilities that may make up a significant portion of something that can be called ‘general athletic ability’. Coaches and teams that use this selection tool see greatly increased performance overall from their picks when they use this new test as part of the selection criteria. Coaches and scouts do all sorts of things that really do not demonstrate te “best” athlete. They do an OK, (not great), job picking athletes who do well in one sport. There is no _g[Sup]p[/Sup]_, in the way that the imaginary _g_ of intelligence is bandied about. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2015, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/208 "2015-07-19T23:48:28Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Really? People don’t know someone or have lost someone to lung cancer, prostate cancer, brain cancer, heart disease, bone cancer, liver cancer…? Of course. Many do know such people. And many contribute to research for those. Maybe more people donate more money to breast cancer, but I’m not sure what that proves. I know more people who have had breast cancer than any other single cancer, although I have known people with all kinds of cancer. Personally, although I am a man, I have contributed money to ovarian cancer research. I’m losing your point somewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/209 "2015-07-20T00:38:48Z")
I think people are sniping on **LinusK** for little reason other than petty retaliation for even insinuating that a legacy movement just might have some serious problems today. Some of his arguments were not that good but others are perfectly legitimate and have not been addressed. I expect this board to behave at a higher standard than just a ‘you are either for us or against all us’ response. I have already given my reasons for not calling myself a feminist even though I support many of the same issues that they support. The main reason is because the label doesn’t mean anything in particular as admitted by the feminists in this thread. That is a bad sign for any coherent movement and a signal that maybe it is time to rethink and regroup if necessary with possible delineations between the differing factions so that self-contradictory groups aren’t lumped under one broad label that others can’t easily tell the difference between. Another gigantic criticism that should be a red flag for everyone is the wide-spread disinformation campaigns that public facing feminism uses a go-to strategy. Everything from pay inequality to rape statistics so frequently paraded out by feminist organizations are complete bullshit and the SDMB of all places should have no tolerance for that. A better strategy would be to break things down by single issues and stop relying on an umbrella term that includes people that don’t agree on much of anything including many nutty extremists. You would find a lot better support if you didn’t have to depend on the mental crutch of declaring everyone that didn’t accept the label ‘feminist’ as your enemy. The political landscape and people in general are a lot more nuanced than that. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/210 "2015-07-20T00:42:18Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > I think people are sniping on **LinusK** for little reason other than petty retaliation for even insinuating that a movement just might have some serious problems. Some of his arguments were not that good but others are perfectly legitimate and have not been addressed. I expect this board to behave at a higher standard than just a ‘you are either for us or against all us’ response. Like what? Several of us have disagreed (in a respectful tone, it seems to me), without response from **LinusK**. So we’ve continued to disagree and make arguments to support our views. Which posts are you referring to? > [@](#): > > Another gigantic criticism that should be a red flag for everyone is the wide-spread disinformation campaigns that public facing feminism uses a go-to strategy. Everything from pay inequality to rape statistics so frequently paraded out by feminist organizations are complete bullshit and the SDMB of all places should have no tolerance for that. I assume you have some cites to back up that these statistics are “complete bullshit” and not just, you know, contested by other statistics that may be different. > [@](#): > > A better strategy would be to break things down by single issues and stop relying on an umbrella term that includes people that don’t agree on much of anything including many nutty extremists. You would find a lot better support if you didn’t have to depend on the mental crutch of declaring everyone that didn’t accept the label ‘feminist’ as your enemy. The political landscape and people in general are a lot more nuanced than that. Who are you referring to? Who is labeling “everyone that didn’t accept the label ‘feminist’” as the enemy? Are you sure this isn’t just a straw-man? ---
**Author:** ![Sunny\_Daze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunny_daze/32/438_2.png) [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/211 "2015-07-20T00:44:17Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …so just that we are clear LinusK, this is a witnessing thread, and you don’t intend to debate? I have come to the conclusion you are correct. ETA: what **iyandiii** just said for that matter. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/212 "2015-07-20T01:19:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I assume you have some cites to back up that these statistics are “complete bullshit” and not just, you know, contested by other statistics that may be different. > > Who are you referring to? Who is labeling “everyone that didn’t accept the label ‘feminist’” as the enemy? Are you sure this isn’t just a straw-man? The cites for the first are all of them full stop. Women do not make 72 cents on the dollar for the same work as a man. 1 in 5 or 4 college women do not get raped. That is a complete fabrication. You can come up with some cites of your own to support those if you truly believe otherwise but I am not interested in debating people that make up statistics to incite shock. Next up - Flat Earthers versus Sphereists - Who is right? For point #2, it isn’t a straw-man at all. I am the loving father of two daughters raised by a very strong and successful single mother. I don’t consider myself a feminist (neither does my mother) even though we don’t put up with any sex discrimination. All the females in my life do whatever they want because they can. Yes, there is pressure to call yourself a feminist on this board and other left-leaning arenas. It isn’t that simple. People like me try to be fair and look at single issues one at a time rather than using umbrella terms. I am certainly not an MRA either but I am sympathetic to some of their concerns as well. Everyone needs to adopt this approach. Attaching team names to the back of your jersey is counterproductive. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/213 "2015-07-20T01:38:37Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Here we go again. > > YOU don’t see that. In a previous thread, you were shown where feminists talk about these things. You made up reasons that it didn’t count. > > YOU don’t see that because YOU refuse to see that, even when it’s pointed out to you. > > YOU don’t see that because YOU seem to have some issues bound up with feminism and YOU are incapable of looking beyond that. > > YOU don’t see that. YOU. Ok. Show me the feminist protests against sentencing disparities between men and women. Show me the feminist marches against the occupational death gap between men and women. Show me feminists organizing against the disparity of arrests and outcomes in domestic violence cases. Show me feminist outrage over the difference in outcomes in custody cases. Show me feminists who’re trying to stop prison rape. Show me feminists who are outraged that women have always been exempt from the the draft. Show me feminists who complain about the way the media portrays men’s lives as less valuable than women’s. Do it, and I’ll admit I’m wrong: and that feminism is really about equality after all. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/214 "2015-07-20T01:41:25Z")
> [@JVDaly](#): > > I freely admit I could be wrong, but I would be absolutely stunned if the number of column inches devoted to, say, the sentencing disparity was even 10% of those devoted to “Manspreading”, or Sansa’s rape scene in Game of Thrones, or sexism at Comic Con, or any one of a hundred other trivial issues. > > The internet is pretty big. I could probably find articles by MRA’s decrying “rape culture” if I looked hard enough. That doesn’t mean the MRA movement as a whole considers it a priority. I’m waiting to be stunned. ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/215 "2015-07-20T01:46:33Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Ok. > > Show me the feminist protests against sentencing disparities between men and women. > > Show me the feminist marches against the occupational death gap between men and women. > > Show me feminists organizing against the disparity of arrests and outcomes in domestic violence cases. > > Show me feminist outrage over the difference in outcomes in custody cases. > > Show me feminists who’re trying to stop prison rape. > > Show me feminists who are outraged that women have always been exempt from the the draft. > > Show me feminists who complain about the way the media portrays men’s lives as less valuable than women’s. > > Do it, and I’ll admit I’m wrong: and that feminism is really about equality after all. If most of these changes happened, it would make me (for one) much less sympathetic towards feminism, not more. And I’m pretty far from being a feminist. There are very good reasons for why there should be a general social understanding that, at some level, men’s lives actually are less valuable than women. Start from the fact that, in an evolutionary sense, the vast majority of men in a society are, uh, expendable. Women aren’t. ---
**Author:** ![Shagnasty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9dc877/32.png) [@Shagnasty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shagnasty)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/216 "2015-07-20T01:50:54Z")
> [@Hector\_St\_Clare](#): > > If most of these changes happened, it would make me (for one) much less sympathetic towards feminism, not more. And I’m pretty far from being a feminist. > > There are very good reasons for why there should be a general social understanding that, at some level, men’s lives actually are less valuable than women. Start from the fact that, in an evolutionary sense, the vast majority of men in a society are, uh, expendable. Women aren’t. That is one controversial opinion. I respect that (honestly) and I believe it is probably true. That particular opinion would explain a lot of things if were proven to be accurate and it probably is. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/217 "2015-07-20T01:53:04Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > I said feminists talk about these things. They do. I’m a feminist and I talk about these things (in threads where the OP participates, no less). I’ve talked to other feminists about these things. I’ve read other feminists writing about these things. The OP has seen links about these things. His claims, therefore, that feminism isn’t about equality because feminists don’t talk about these issues is inaccurate. It’s also plain goofy to pick some topics, claim that these and only these topics prove an interest in equality, and close your mind to any other conversation. > > Are these particular topics a priority? For some feminists, yes. For others, no. **They are a priority for me because I see both women and men impacted negatively by the notion that women are frail caregivers who are utterly child-centric and so fragile while men are big brutes who can’t be trusted with children and who must be civilized by delicate female sensibilities.** > > As with all large groups, its easier to get feminists to talk about hot, fun topics than dull, boring ones. So you talk about outrages in pop culture rather than academic studies. Christian writers spend more column inches talking about SSM than about the Eucharist, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t interested in theology. It means that talking about hard subjects is harder and requires more research and more dedication than firing off some easy blog post about an anime character’s nipples. > > And the readership for the pop culture ephemera will be higher. Just as it’s more fun to write about the hot topic, it’s more fun to read as well. And I can read dozens of goofy articles in the time I can read one academic study. Bolding mine: I’m glad we agree about something. Though I wouldn’t put it the same way, I think there’s some common ground in there. As for academia, I’m not sure you’re right. My impression is that academia is a stronghold for feminism. [Here](http://acrosswalls.org/bitter-scholarly-controversy-domestic-violence/?otxkey=post-6995) is some evidence: > [@](#): > > Symbolic violence in the field of domestic and partner violence research has a long history. It began in 1975 with the pioneering National Family Violence Survey. Using a broad measure of physical violence, that survey found that roughly 12% of both men and women physically assaulted their partners.^ One lead author of the study, who identifies himself as a feminist^, ignored the implications of these statistics and initially focused on male domination of women as the cause of partner violence.^ His female scholarly colleague, however, in 1977 wrote a scholarly article, “The Battered Husband Syndrome.” That article explored the characteristics of men victims of partner violence. In response to her article, the author received a deluge of scholarly abuse, as well as a bomb threat at her daughter’s wedding.^ > > All three lead authors of the 1975 study suffered-long lasting personal attacks as result of their finding of gender symmetry in domestic violence. One of the lead authors more than two decades later observed: > > our finding that the rate of female-to-male family violence was equal to the rate of male-to-female violence not only produced heated scholarly criticism, but intense and long-lasting personal attacks. All three of us received death threats. Bomb threats were phoned in to conference centers and buildings where we were scheduled to present. {The female lead author} received the brunt of the attacks—individuals wrote and called her university urging that she be denied tenure; calls were made and letters were written to government agencies urging that her grant funding be rescinded. All three of us became ‘non persons’ among advocates. Invitations to conferences dwindled and dried up. Advocacy literature and feminist writing would cite our research, but not attribute it to us. Librarians publicly stated they would not order or shelve our books.^ > > Despite the attacks, one of the lead authors persevered. He became a leading scholar in objective, social-scientific study of family violence. In 2011, at age 85, he wrote the lead review article for Current Controversies on the Role of Gender in Partner Violence. He declared: > > The high prevalence of PV {partner violence} by women, either minor violence or clinical-level violence, is not perceived by the public and is often denied or concealed by academics. The denial and concealment is documented in {references}. It is crucial to change academic denial and public perception because ending PV by women is morally, legally, and therapeutically necessary. It is also an essential step in reducing violence against women because, as {reference} found, “…a woman’s perpetration of violence was the strongest predictor of her being a victim of partner violence.” Similar conclusions follow from the longitudinal study of {reference} and {reference}’s meta analysis of risk factors for victimization. The effort to end PV by women must include attention to psychological aggression and minor violence by women such as slapping and throwing things at a partner because those behaviors are harmful themselves and because they tend to evoke retaliation and escalate into more severe attacks by both parties {references}. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/218 "2015-07-20T01:56:26Z")
> [@Shagnasty](#): > > The cites for the first are all of them full stop. Women do not make 72 cents on the dollar for the same work as a man. 1 in 5 or 4 college women do not get raped. That is a complete fabrication. I’m not going to just take your word for it (not that I accept for certain that those numbers are perfectly accurate). > [@](#): > > For point #2, it isn’t a straw-man at all. I am the loving father of two daughters raised by a very strong and successful single mother. I don’t consider myself a feminist (neither does my mother) even though we don’t put up with any sex discrimination. All the females in my life do whatever they want because they can. Yes, there is pressure to call yourself a feminist on this board and other left-leaning arenas. It isn’t that simple. People like me try to be fair and look at single issues one at a time rather than using umbrella terms. I am certainly not an MRA either but I am sympathetic to some of their concerns as well. Everyone needs to adopt this approach. Attaching team names to the back of your jersey is counterproductive. Huh? What does this have to do with what I said? Who says you or other non-feminists are the enemy? Who are you arguing with? ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/219 "2015-07-20T02:01:11Z")
Let’s start with prison rape. This is from the first two pages of a Google search for “feminism prison rape”: > **[Why We Need to Stop Justifying Prison Rape Against People Who Commit Violent...](https://everydayfeminism.com/2015/04/stop-justifying-prison-rape/)** > > Whoa. Once you've seen this startling side of the truth, it's hard to shrug at prison rape. [http://veganfeministnetwork.com/tag/prison-rape/](http://veganfeministnetwork.com/tag/prison-rape/) [http://m.nsvrc.org/blogs/feminist-justice-spotlight-rape-detention](http://m.nsvrc.org/blogs/feminist-justice-spotlight-rape-detention) [http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/10/1350712/-Random-Rant-Prison-rape-IS-rape-culture](http://m.dailykos.com/story/2014/12/10/1350712/-Random-Rant-Prison-rape-IS-rape-culture) > **[The Feministing Five: Lovisa Stannow](http://feministing.com/2014/03/15/the-feministing-five-lovisa-stannow/)** > >  The next time you are looking forward a wonder woman, look no further than Lovoisa Stannow. An established activist and current executive director of Just Detention International, she upholds an extraordinarily difficult yet vital mission — to... What’s hilarious is that the majority of the rest of the links are MRA trying to play “gotcha” with the issue of prison rape. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 20, 2015, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/220 "2015-07-20T02:01:16Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …oh come on now, surely you are just taking the piss now aren’t you? Is this a parody thread? > > This is an objective claim. I’m a feminist, and I most certainly am not against it (assuming, of course, that both parents are suitable to be parents.) There are plenty of feminists in this thread and I’m pretty sure they will tell you the same thing. > > Your claim that feminists are against what you said is demonstrably false. I’m happy to hear that you’re not against shared parenting. [NOW isn’t with you, though](http://www.nownys.org/archives/leg_memos/oppose_a00330.html): > [@](#): > > The National Organization for Women, New York State, Inc. strongly urges the Assembly and Senate of New York to oppose this legislation. This bill seeks to “create the statutory of presumption of joint custody for all minor children whose parents are no longer married, so that both parents can continue to share in the responsibilities and duties of the children’s upbringing.” > > “Shared Parenting” is defined as “the award of custody to both parties so that both parties share equally the legal responsibility and control of such child and share equally the living experience in time and physical care of assure frequent and continuing contact with both parties, as the court deems to be in the best interests of the child, taking into consideration the location and circumstances of each party.” > > The assertion that “shared parenting is in the best interests of minor children” is on its face untrue and is directly contradicted by the body of academic research on this subject, as well as the disastrous experience of California (one of the first states to adopt this experiment)… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=12)