# 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:** 5
**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 18, 2015, 12:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/81 "2015-07-18T12:29:56Z")
I take issue with the following assertions from the OP and don’t accept that they accurately describe anything more than, at most, fringe portions of feminism and fringe feminists: > [@LinusK](#): > > I’m going to start with what I consider both the most difficult and most important concept: feminism is not, and has never been, about exterminating patriarchy. > > Feminism is about providing women with freedom without accountability; while at the same time attempting to define for men what it means to be a man (which happens to overlap with what it meant to be a man under patriarchy.) > > Feminism uses patriarchal ideology to advance its own interests. After all, one of the defining characteristics of patriarchy, when it comes to men, is the demand that men put women’s concerns - and especially their safety - above the concerns of men. Under patriarchy, a man who fails to put woman’s safety and concerns above his own, is not a real man. > > Feminism uses that patriarchal idea to ridicule and shame men who become critics of feminism. It’s simple to do: any time men organize themselves: for example, in a “Men’s Rights Movement” (a terrible name, by the way), you simply question their masculinity. “No ‘real man’ would be part of such a group.” It’s a common example. It’s easy to say, and hard to disagree with. Real men do not need help or advocacy, after all. Men take care of their problems themselves. You may say that’s unfair or unequal, or even “patriarchal”, but the idea is so ingrained in our culture it’s useless to fight against. Feminists, in fact, are quickest to use it. Which is an example of how feminism is both (a) not about equality, and (b) not abut eliminating patriarchy. Feminists are very quick to advance patriarchal ideas, when it suits their interests. > > Feminism is also not about “equality”. The claim, however, is extraordinarily useful: after all, who could be against “equality”? Feminism is about advancing the interests of women, period. And particularly about advancing the interests of the women who are already among the most privileged people on the planet. (By the way, if anyone reading this sincerely believes feminism is about equality, I’m not questioning your sincerity: I’m just saying you’re wrong.) ---
**Author:** ![Slithy\_Tove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slithy_tove/32/18248_2.png) [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/82 "2015-07-18T13:20:13Z")
> [@ddsun](#): > > So as far as that little corner of the OP goes, get over it. And there’s the rub. As a reasonable person, I can’t see feminism as anything but an essential, necessary moral compass to make this world as fair and equitable as possible. But how much progress can a movement which seeks to improve human nature ever be, when it still resorts to the worst aspects of human nature? Scapegoating, hereditary guilt, “we’re convinced that we are the good people, so they must be the bad people.” So long as women are faced with murder and rape, or at least with thwarted lives, any concerns such as the demonization of boys or the petty indignities that women are allowed to inflict on men, as well as the rare though severe false rape accusation, can be dismissed as the acceptable casualties in the war on injustice. Feminism has proved that human beings won’t put up with that kind of shit. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/83 "2015-07-18T13:45:19Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > I can’t really argue with anything you’ve said. I will add this: breast cancer is the worst kind of cancer because… brain cancer is so much fun? I just Googled “breast cancer is the worst kind of cancer” because I have never heard anyone make this claim before. The search produced a single hit – this thread. Google doesn’t search everything, but it does search a lot, and it couldn’t find anyone other than you who’d ever said this. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/84 "2015-07-18T13:54:12Z")
I’ve never heard anyone claim breast cancer is the worst; you’d have to picture some kind of uber-insane ultra-feminist who was totally ignorant of science and statistics voicing that. Lung cancer is worst, actually, followed distantly by breast cancer for women (and prostate cancer for men), then colorectal and pancreatic. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/85 "2015-07-18T14:09:02Z")
> [@even\_sven](#): > > It’s seriously not that big a deal. I can’t imagine why the 8 weeks that it took to recover from birth should determine my entire career trajectory. 8 weeks. And I had a longer recovery time because I had a C-Section. > > (Yes, I know some people have complications, but even women who have many kids would be hard pressed to put together a full year of time that they are biologically unable to work. Women being the ones to give birth is not the golden bullet explanation.) Worse, I’ve BEEN in meetings where it was decided not to promote a woman because she MIGHT have children. Not that they knew, she was single. Maybe she was a lesbian - we really didn’t know anything about her personal life. But she was young and unmarried and maybe she’d get married and have children and then maybe she’d quit, so lets promote the guy who already has a child instead. HE won’t quit his job, he has a family to support. Career trajectory determined not by eight weeks, but by a societal expectation that might not even apply. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/86 "2015-07-18T14:12:20Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > I’ve never heard anyone claim breast cancer is the worst; you’d have to picture some kind of uber-insane ultra-feminist who was totally ignorant of science and statistics voicing that. > > Lung cancer is worst, actually, followed distantly by breast cancer for women (and prostate cancer for men), then colorectal and pancreatic. Private donations to and public spending on breast cancer appears to be much higher than on any other form of cancer, so it does seem that there is a widespread opinion that breast cancer is the worst. [Donations vers. Deaths](http://thebullelephant.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Donating.vs_.Death-Graph.0.jpg) [NCI Spending](http://image.asbestos.com/uploads/blog-images/2014/11/spending-by-cancer-type-2013.jpg) [The UK too](http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9771355.ece/alternates/w460/graph.jpg) ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/87 "2015-07-18T14:18:45Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > So for instance, [this poster](http://i.imgur.com/cIiJ1Sy.jpg) is anti-feminist? That poster is pragmatic. It isn’t fair, but the reality of life is that getting accused of rape is a risk men face, similar to the risk women face of getting raped. To me, its akin to the posters that remind women not to walk alone, to know anyone they get into a car with, to carry their keys between their fingers. Both of those types of posters are patronizing, they treat their audience like children - and try to prevent something by changing the behavior of the prospective victim instead of addressing the behavior of the guilty party -but they might raise awareness (for those that were raised under a box) and they might stop something bad from happening. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/88 "2015-07-18T14:22:52Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Private donations to and public spending on breast cancer appears to be much higher than on any other form of cancer, so it does seem that there is a widespread opinion that breast cancer is the worst. > > [Donations vers. Deaths](http://thebullelephant.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Donating.vs_.Death-Graph.0.jpg) > > [NCI Spending](http://image.asbestos.com/uploads/blog-images/2014/11/spending-by-cancer-type-2013.jpg) > > [The UK too](http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9771355.ece/alternates/w460/graph.jpg) That seems to be a strange conclusion from that data. I would have made the conclusion that breast cancer charities have the best marketing. ---
**Author:** ![Slithy\_Tove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slithy_tove/32/18248_2.png) [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/89 "2015-07-18T14:51:04Z")
When it’s not about sex but about class. Middle and upper class women don’t smoke and they can afford to take better care of themselves. But diet and exercise won’t protect against genetic markers for breast cancer. So when Susan Komen died of cancer, her rich family took affront to this injustice by marshaling all the resources of their wealth and position. Anecdotal, I admit, but I went through both college and the enlisted military. There was a lot more rape in the military. Years later, when the number and profile was higher due to the Afghanistan & Iraq wars, you did hear about the problem of military rape. Somewhat. But the working class women being raped in the military never had the same media coverage and public outrage as the middle class women raped in college. ---
**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 18, 2015, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/90 "2015-07-18T14:51:42Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Private donations to and public spending on breast cancer appears to be much higher than on any other form of cancer, so it does seem that there is a widespread opinion that breast cancer is the worst. > > [Donations vers. Deaths](http://thebullelephant.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Donating.vs_.Death-Graph.0.jpg) > > [NCI Spending](http://image.asbestos.com/uploads/blog-images/2014/11/spending-by-cancer-type-2013.jpg) > > [The UK too](http://www.independent.co.uk/incoming/article9771355.ece/alternates/w460/graph.jpg) 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. ---
**Author:** ![Slithy\_Tove](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slithy_tove/32/18248_2.png) [@Slithy\_Tove](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slithy_Tove)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/91 "2015-07-18T15:09:19Z")
That is understandable. But I’m nostalgic for the days when rich women like Elenore Roosevelt worked on behalf of the desperately poor, instead of middle class women mailing in yogurt foils for the benefit of other middle class women. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/92 "2015-07-18T15:20:38Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > That seems to be a strange conclusion from that data. I would have made the conclusion that breast cancer charities have the best marketing. > [@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. Gonna have to go with Dangerosa on this one. Breast cancer just isn’t the most common (obviously because it’s so rare for men) and only second for women. More people should have an emotional connection to lung cancer. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/93 "2015-07-18T15:26:25Z")
I’m not the first person to make this observation, but if a company or organization wishes to make a public show of supporting women then breast cancer is probably the least controversial cause they could throw money at. Even misogynists aren’t pro breast cancer. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/94 "2015-07-18T16:34:31Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Gonna have to go with Dangerosa on this one. Breast cancer just isn’t the most common (obviously because it’s so rare for men) and only second for women. More people should have an emotional connection to lung cancer. The problem with lung cancer is that most (albeit not all) sufferers get it as a result of smoking, and the general opinion among the non-smoking public is that that makes it their own damn fault. Whereas breast cancer is far more blame-free. ---
**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 18, 2015, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/95 "2015-07-18T18:06:39Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > The problem with lung cancer is that most (albeit not all) sufferers get it as a result of smoking, and the general opinion among the non-smoking public is that that makes it their own damn fault. Whereas breast cancer is far more blame-free. Anti-smoking campaigns receive and enormous amount of funding, and are pretty successful. Lung cancer is one that is more efficient to fight from the “prevention” side. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/96 "2015-07-18T18:33:56Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Gonna have to go with Dangerosa on this one. Breast cancer just isn’t the most common (obviously because it’s so rare for men) and only second for women. More people should have an emotional connection to lung cancer. Breast cancer is actually by far the most common cancer among women. It’s not the _deadliest_ cancer among women – that is lung cancer – but many more women are diagnosed with breast cancer. (Cite: [CDC Cancer Statistics - Women](http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/data/women.htm)) ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/97 "2015-07-18T19:47:43Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > This does not describe most feminists or feminism as far as my understanding. In my understanding, feminism (for most feminists, anyway) really is about advocating that women be treated equally and fairly by law and by society. If feminism was about equality, you’d expect them to be concerned about sentencing disparities between men and women, the occupational death gap, the disparity of arrests and outcomes in domestic violence cases, the difference in outcomes in custody cases, prison rape (of men), the historical disparity of women being exempt from the draft, or the way the media portrays men’s lives as less valuable than women’s. You might even expect them to be outraged at the scene in Titanic, when Leonardo DiCaprio’s character freezes, and sinks to the bottom of the sea, while Kate Winslet floats away on her raft. (Why was it again that she gets the raft?) But you don’t see that. Which leads me to the conclusion that “feminism is about equality” is a useful lie, rather than something that’s actually true about feminism. ---
**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 18, 2015, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/98 "2015-07-18T19:52:34Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > If feminism was about equality, you’d expect them to be concerned about sentencing disparities between men and women, the occupational death gap, the disparity of arrests and outcomes in domestic violence cases, the difference in outcomes in custody cases, prison rape (of men), the historical disparity of women being exempt from the draft, or the way the media portrays men’s lives as less valuable than women’s. You might even expect them to be outraged at the scene in Titanic, when Leonardo DiCaprio’s character freezes, and sinks to the bottom of the sea, while Kate Winslet floats away on her raft. (Why was it again that she gets the raft?) > > But you don’t see that. Which leads me to the conclusion that “feminism is about equality” is a useful lie, rather than something that’s actually true about feminism. 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. ---
**Author:** ![JVDaly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/edb3f5/32.png) [@JVDaly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JVDaly)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/99 "2015-07-18T20:30:38Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > 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. 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. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2015, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/100 "2015-07-18T20:31:24Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > I’d like to hear of some pre-modern cultures where females were considered more valuable than men. Can you tell me of one where, for instance, female babies were thought to be more fortuitous than male? > > Because it seems to me that throughout history, boys were considered far more valuable than girls. After all, boys could help out on the farm, while all girls were good for was for dumping on some other family - and even then, you had to pay a dowry. > > Women may have been considered valuable property that required protection, but then, you could say the same about livestock. Doesn’t mean that men were less valuable than sheep. I think that’s a good question. I don’t have the ability to answer it completely, because part of your question goes beyond what I actually know. I think a partial answer to your question might be this, though: when a man commits to a woman, and agrees to protect her and her children indefinitely, even at the cost of his own health, safety, and enjoyment - of, for example, the products of his own labor - he’s giving up something. In fact, he may be giving up a lot, depending on how dangerous things get: if there’s conflict with another group, or some danger that needs to be dealt with, or a food supply that’s particularly difficult or dangerous to acquire, he’s may very well wind up risking his own life. (Remember, the death rate of men, historically is twice that of women.) When somebody agrees to a contract (like the one I outlined above) they ordinarily want something in return. I suspect that (and I don’t know, of course, because I wasn’t there) it was something like this: an agreement that his mate not mate with other men (for obvious reasons), and that she respect him, at least publicly, and defer to his judgment. What that would mean in practice would differ from culture to culture, but I think that, or something like it, was probably the original deal. Obviously, that deal is now outmoded. Women, decades ago, became unsatisfied with it, and no longer feel they should defer to, or respect men. Which is reasonable. What’s not reasonable, is that despite opting out of the original deal, feminists want men to continue to uphold their end of it. They are quick to shame any man who attempts to opt out, while simultaneously making relationships with women ever more dangerous for men: If you touch a woman without explicit permission, it’s rape! If you have sex with a woman who’s been drinking, it’s rape! If a woman claims you raped her, even if you didn’t, it’s still rape! (Because doubting a rape victim is the equivalent of shaming a rape victim!) If a woman gets tired of you (or finds a higher-status man), takes your house, your property, your kids, and treats you like a human ATM, well, too bad, sucker! This dynamic is unsustainable. But it’s where modern feminism is trying to take us. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=6)