# 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:** 26
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/501 "2015-07-25T15:22:23Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > **tomndebb** : I’m going to choose to not engage with you, because of the combination of the tone of your post, and your moderator status. I’ve seen too many examples (not necessarily on this board) of moderators abusing their privileges to respond to posts like this one, from a moderator. No, it happens on this board, too, and with that “poster” (I have to refer to him as a poster and not a moderator because complaints about moderators HAVE to go in ATMB.) I have asked him repeatedly NOT to engage me and I never engage him. You can see from this thread how much self-control he has. He quotes me and tries to get responses from me all the time. Whatever, I guess he’s just so enamored with my posts he can’t help himself. A form of flattery, I suppose. And I’m sure you noticed how he ignores the rules. No insults are allowed, but he compares the “post” to an insulting subject. He did it up thread. It allows a “poster” to claim he was only referring to the post. It’s a horseshit trick, but as you saw up thread, some “posters” do it in the knowledge they’ll get away with it. And he did. ---
**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 25, 2015, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/502 "2015-07-25T15:23:49Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > No, it happens on this board, too, and with that “poster” (I have to refer to him as a poster and not a moderator because complaints about moderators HAVE to go in ATMB.) I have asked him repeatedly NOT to engage me and I never engage him. You can see from this thread how much self-control he has. He quotes me and tries to get responses from me all the time. Whatever, I guess he’s just so enamored with my posts he can’t help himself. A form of flattery, I suppose. > > And I’m sure you noticed how he ignores the rules. No insults are allowed, but he compares the “post” to an insulting subject. He did it up thread. It allows a “poster” to claim he was only referring to the post. It’s a horseshit trick, but as you saw up thread, some “posters” do it in the knowledge they’ll get away with it. And he did. It’s not against the rules to criticize or insult posts… so I can say “your post was dumb”, but not “you are dumb”. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/503 "2015-07-25T15:27:59Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > Really? Was **tomndebb** posting as a moderator when he claimed that I requested my own link be broken? He didn’t state anywhere in that post that he was posting as a moderator, but where the hell did he get that info? Not sure what point you are ultimately making here. If it seems proper to you, I’ll go ahead and amend what I said–replace my “posting as a moderator” with “moderating.” In the one you’re talking about, you might say he was “posting as a moderator” if you like, but the more relevant point is that he wasn’t _moderating_. > [@](#): > > (What he posted was false anyway: I requested a spoiler box be added to bring it into compliance with the double-click rule due to the use of “motherfucker,” in case that was NSFW. I never requested the link be disabled.) I can’t figure out why I am supposed to care about this. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/504 "2015-07-25T15:28:20Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > **tomndebb** : I’m going to choose to not engage with you, because of the combination of the tone of your post, and your moderator status. I’ve seen too many examples (not necessarily on this board) of moderators abusing their privileges to respond to posts like this one, from a moderator. This is silly. No one has ever been silenced or Modded for disagreeing with me. Tone? My tone has not included your shrill cries of unfairness, (as you unfairly lump together many disparate views expressed by different feminists as if they were a single opinion so that you can set up a straw man attack on some “feminism” that exists only in your mind.) That said, if you choose to fail to respond to my posts, I am under no such compulsion to fail to point out your errors. That you resort to these sort of silly complaints in order to duck away from the legitimate criticisms I have posted simply indicates the acuracy of my observations. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/505 "2015-07-25T15:33:12Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > Really? Was **tomndebb** posting as a moderator when he claimed that I requested my own link be broken? He didn’t state anywhere in that post that he was posting as a moderator, but where the hell did he get that info? > > (What he posted was false anyway: I requested a spoiler box be added to bring it into compliance with the double-click rule due to the use of “motherfucker,” in case that was NSFW. I never requested the link be disabled.) I did not modify the post. Another Mod broke the URL, but the coding resulted in an apparent link that was totally broken. After the broken link was reported, I simply re-established the URL, but disengaged the automatic link so that anyone who wished to view it could copy the actual URL into an address field and visit the site. My action made an unreachable site reachable. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/506 "2015-07-25T15:41:34Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > No, it happens on this board, too, and with that “poster” (I have to refer to him as a poster and not a moderator because complaints about moderators HAVE to go in ATMB.) I have asked him repeatedly NOT to engage me and I never engage him. You can see from this thread how much self-control he has. He quotes me and tries to get responses from me all the time. Whatever, I guess he’s just so enamored with my posts he can’t help himself. A form of flattery, I suppose. > > And I’m sure you noticed how he ignores the rules. No insults are allowed, but he compares the “post” to an insulting subject. He did it up thread. It allows a “poster” to claim he was only referring to the post. It’s a horseshit trick, but as you saw up thread, some “posters” do it in the knowledge they’ll get away with it. And he did. Sorry. No poster has the right to demand another poster not post. If you insist on posting errors, you are going to be corrected. When you demand that another poster not correct your errors, you are simply trying to demand that only you may post on a topic without contradiction or correction. This is the debate forum; no one is going to allow you free rein to post without challenge. When a poster submits nonsense, their posts , (but not their persons), are open targets for ridicule. If you find that uncomfortable, you are free to refrain from posting. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/507 "2015-07-25T15:48:33Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There are plenty of female engineers. \ According to the [MIT Women’s Initiative](http://web.mit.edu/wi/home2.shtml), 13.4% of people in the engineering workforce are women. > [@](#): > > Heavy vehicle and mobile equipment service technicians and mechanics: Percent Female = 1.6 > > Carpenters: Percent Female = 1.6 > > Automotive body and related repairers: Percent Female = 1.5 > > Operating engineers and other construction equipment operators: Percent Female = 1.5 > > Aircraft pilots and flight engineers: Percent Female = 1.3 > > Pipelayers, plumbers, pipefitters, and steamfitters: Percent Female = 1.3 > > Electrical power-line installers and repairers: Percent Female = 1.3 > > Crane and tower operators: Percent Female = 1.1 > > Bus and truck mechanics and diesel engine specialists: Percent Female = 0.8 > > Tool and die makers: Percent Female = 0.8 > > Heating, air conditioning, refrigeration mechanics and installers: Percent Female = 0.7 > > Logging workers: Percent Female = 0.7 > > Cement masons, concrete finishers, and terrazzo workers: Percent Female = 0.6 > > Small engine mechanics: Percent Female = 0.5 > > Roofers: Percent Female = 0.5 > > Brickmasons, blockmasons, and stonemasons: Percent Female = 0.1 [US Dept. of Labor.](http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/nontra2009_txt.htm) ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/508 "2015-07-25T15:49:17Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > It’s not against the rules to criticize or insult posts… so I can say “your post was dumb”, but not “you are dumb”. No duh. Which is why it’s ok to say, “Your posts are beginning to look like a bad ripoff of…(insert horseshit insult here).” Which we already saw up thread. ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/509 "2015-07-25T15:52:01Z")
> [@Frylock](#): > > I can’t figure out why I am supposed to care about this. Because it’s grippingly fascinating, that’s why. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/510 "2015-07-25T15:52:38Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Well, hypothetically, if men disappeared overnight, these are not jobs you could just pick up and start doing the next day. You can’t, for example, just start repairing or installing high-voltage electrical lines and equipment without (I assume) some pretty extensive training. Modern commercial fishing isn’t just baiting a hook: a factory/trawler is a huge, high-tech machine. It drops a 100+ ft nets to just above the bottom of the sea, and pulls up (if they’re successful) 100+ tons of fish at a time. What I did - being a lowly factory worker - didn’t require much in the way of training or experience (other than: “don’t put your hand there, if you want to keep it”) but many of the other jobs did: finding the fish in the first place, for example, or fixing things that went wrong. Construction is not only physically dangerous, but requires a wide range of skills. Watching them - from the comfort of my air-conditioned office - makes me appreciate not only the incredible amount of organization and precise engineering that goes into making a building like that, but also my privilege in being able to do non-physical labor in the comfort of an air-conditioned office in the first place. > > Anyway, the point is that despite being low-status, blue-collar jobs, many of those same jobs require not just strength, stamina and a high tolerance for risk of injury and death; but a large skill-set, and tons of experience. And one may equally make the observation that if women all disappeared, men would be left with very little medical care as women compose 74.2% of the health industry. And while “only” 36.7% of physicians are women and 25% of EMT techs are women, women make up the overwhelming majority of every other health related field. Your claim was just meaningless. If any large group of people disappeared from society, the remaining society would suffer for some period. When you then went on to imply that women would be unable to pick up many of those jobs because they did not like cockroaches, (while ignoring the inability of men to change diapers), you took you meaningless claim into the realm of just dumb. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/511 "2015-07-25T15:55:52Z")
Can I just ask why a fantasy scenario - half the population disappearing overnight - _has any bearing on anything?_ ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/512 "2015-07-25T15:57:17Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I would suspect naval crews are cross-trained far better than civilians, because losing big chunks of people in a battle is not a remote possibility. > > If all the men vanished the remaining women would be in trouble in the short run, If all the women vanished the remaining men would be in trouble in the short term. Hell, if a random 50% of people would vanish the survivors would be in trouble. In all cases others could be trained, but it would have to be done as things were falling apart. > > But the worst on the list is > Refuse and recyclable material collectors > in my town the truck does most of the work. Does **LinusK** think women can’t drive trucks? No. I think they **don’t** drive trucks. And there’s no great feminist movement to get more women into driving trucks. Because, well, it’s a low-status shitty (but absolutely necessary) job, isn’t it? ---
**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 25, 2015, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/513 "2015-07-25T15:57:57Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > According to the [MIT Women’s Initiative](http://web.mit.edu/wi/home2.shtml), 13.4% of people in the engineering workforce are women. > > [US Dept. of Labor.](http://www.dol.gov/wb/factsheets/nontra2009_txt.htm) Yeah – that’s plenty of women. 13% of [all the engineers](http://www.nspe.org/resources/media/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-engineering) in the US adds up to at least 200,000 engineers. Add in all the other intelligent and resourceful women in the US, and they’d be more than capable of keeping the lights on and the toilets running in the absence of men. ---
**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 25, 2015, 4:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/514 "2015-07-25T16:03:47Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Can I just ask why a fantasy scenario - half the population disappearing overnight - _has any bearing on anything?_ Well, I know who not to call on for answers in designing my post-apocalyptic dystopia. Hmph! ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/515 "2015-07-25T16:09:59Z")
> [@camille](#): > > **LinusK** , you don’t seem to understand how mass movements and activism works. > > Every mass movement has its extreme wing, and these are the ones who get the most press. Even your [female anti-feminist](http://www.vice.com/read/the-women-of-the-mens-rights-movement-804) heroes know this: > > And BTW, most of the things these women are saying today is nothing “revelatory”. > > Are you familiar with [The Manipulated Man](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Manipulated_Man) by Esther Vilar? It was published in 1971. The basic premise is _women are stupid, but they manipulate men into being their slaves_. Sound familiar? > > Ms Vilar got herself a lot of publicity back then, and that was before the reach and power of the internet and social media. Karen Straughan et al have basically lifted her ideas and arguments whole cloth. [ul] [li]I’m curious why you think I don’t understand how mass movements and activism works.[/li][li]I’ve never heard of “The Manipulated Man”.[/li][li]If you think that Karen Straughan’s point is that: “women are stupid, but they manipulate men into being their slaves,” then you’re either willfully misrepresenting her, or you haven’t actually listened to what she’s said.[/li][/ul] ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/516 "2015-07-25T16:12:54Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > No duh. Which is why it’s ok to say, “Your posts are beginning to look like a bad ripoff cof…(insert horseshit insult here).” Which we already saw up thread. Yes. It is OK, when a poster has not been subject to any Moderator action complains that he is being unfairly abused by an authority figure, to point out that his posts resemble the complaints of a fictional character similarly complaining of abuse that has not occurred. I made no statements regarding the poster’s intelligence, mental health, honesty, parentage, or personal hygiene. I noted a similarity between his statements and those of another. The distinction is obvious to the vast majority of posters and follows the rules in place on this board for the past 16 years. ---
**Author:** ![Grotonian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/c2a13f/32.png) [@Grotonian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grotonian)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/517 "2015-07-25T16:26:39Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Can I just ask why a fantasy scenario - half the population disappearing overnight - _has any bearing on anything?_ Because if all the women disappeared, hospitals and elementary schools (except in **tomndebb** ’s town) would be an absolute mess, and there would be significant wait times at restaurants and on the phone. But if all the men disappeared, most of our most necessary infrastructure maintenance would come screeching to a halt. And it’s apparently horrifyingly sexist to admit this. Which is why the feminists are denying it. Those plucky gals could do everything the men do, and learn it overnight! There would be no interruption to electricity or sewerage because women can learn everything they’d need to know before the electricity shut off or water stopped. Any suggestion to the contrary is simply ludicrous! The reason this particular discussion has gone on so long is because it’s so awesome to read the arguments from people who care more about spouting their ideological orthodoxy than they do about conceding things we all know are true. It’s fucking hilarious. One town has two male kindergarten teachers, therefore women do not predominate kindergarten teaching. Um, okay dude, gotcha. ---
**Author:** ![Human\_Action](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ac91a4/32.png) [@Human\_Action](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Human_Action)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/518 "2015-07-25T16:29:30Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > Because if all the women disappeared, hospitals and elementary schools (except in **tomndebb** ’s town) would be an absolute mess, and there would be significant wait times at restaurants and on the phone. > > But if all the men disappeared, most of our most necessary infrastructure maintenance would come screeching to a halt. > > And it’s apparently horrifyingly sexist to admit this. Which is why the feminists are denying it. Those plucky gals could do everything the men do, and learn it overnight! There would be no interruption to electricity or sewerage because women can learn everything they’d need to know before the electricity shut off or water stopped. Any suggestion to the contrary is simply ludicrous! > > The reason this particular discussion has gone on so long is because it’s so awesome to read the arguments from people who care more about spouting their ideological orthodoxy than they do about conceding things we all know are true. It’s fucking hilarious. One town has two male kindergarten teachers, therefore women do not predominate kindergarten teaching. Um, okay dude, gotcha. Ok, but again: why does this matter, and what meaning are we supposed to draw from it? ---
**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 25, 2015, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/519 "2015-07-25T16:34:27Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > And it’s apparently horrifyingly sexist to admit this. Which is why the feminists are denying it. Those plucky gals could do everything the men do, and learn it overnight! There would be no interruption to electricity or sewerage because women can learn everything they’d need to know before the electricity shut off or water stopped. Any suggestion to the contrary is simply ludicrous! It’s ludicrous to suggest that there aren’t enough women with those skills, and enough other resourceful and intelligent women, to keep things going until full-staffing levels could be trained. It’s the same for hospitals and schools – enough male nurses (and doctors, obviously) would exist to train others to take those roles, and enough male teachers and professors and the like (and regular educated people) to keep schools running. 100 years ago the number of female engineers were a lot closer to zero than to 6 digit numbers, and most of the old coal burning plants and factories (which also required a lot more maintenance and hands-on workers) would probably have shut down pretty quickly. But thanks to feminism, there are now women in every field, and literally hundreds of thousands of engineers, in addition to the millions of other intelligent and resourceful women. It’s just ludicrous to claim that these hundreds of thousands of engineers + millions of intelligent and resourceful people would be unable to keep modern technology going. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [July 25, 2015, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/520 "2015-07-25T16:41:38Z")
> [@Grotonian](#): > > The reason this particular discussion has gone on so long is because it’s so awesome to read the arguments from people who care more about spouting their ideological orthodoxy than they do about conceding things we all know are true. And now you are attacking **LinusK** and his OP. Interesting. The dumb comment had no real relevance to the actual topic of the thread and was presented poorly. The fascination with that post has more to with **LinusK** and his partisans refusing to admit it’s exaggeration and it’s irrelevance to the topic, along with the normal combative nature of the forum, than it does to ideology. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=25) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=27)