# 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:** 54
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1061 "2015-08-09T03:43:11Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Yeah. I also didn’t quote this […] That’s right, you didn’t quote anything acknowledging that DeCrow had done things you have repeatedly claimed that feminists never do. You didn’t quote anything that acknowledged that DeCrow even _existed_. > [@](#): > > And yes, **DeCrow’s voice is exactly the kind that is "sorely missing from today’s feminist discourse**." > > Oh wait. You didn’t quote that, did you? > > I wonder why not? Why didn’t _you_ quote it? It was your cite. Why did you edit the material you _did_ quote to remove all reference to DeCrow even though she was the subject of the article? Or did you get the already edited quotes from somewhere else? But since you brought it up, it is interesting that feminist journalist Cathy Young feels that today’s feminist discourse needs more voices like DeCrow’s. That seems like more evidence against you. I’m not really familiar with Young’s work, but looking at her [Wikipedia entry](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathy_Young) it looks like she’s spent plenty of time talking about the kinds of things you keep saying feminists don’t talk about. Then there are the feminist fathers’ rights advocates mentioned in the [Salon article](http://www.salon.com/2000/07/06/crusade/) you cited…an article that I just noticed was _also_ written by Cathy Young. So to sum up, your evidence that feminists are “notably absent” when it comes to advocating for fathers’ rights includes two articles about feminists advocating for fathers’ rights that were written by a feminist who is apparently herself concerned about this issue. You presented deceptively edited quotes from these articles to make it look like they supported your claim, and you still have no explanation or excuse for why you did this. You have also failed to honor [your promise](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18531568&postcount=213) about when you’d admit that you were wrong about feminism. You’ve been shown what you asked to be shown, not only by other posters but by your own cites. ---
**Author:** ![hildea](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/ebca7d/32.png) [@hildea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hildea)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 8:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1062 "2015-08-09T08:51:14Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Usually when I assert a fact, I try to provide evidence: Let’s start with you presenting evidence of Indian and Chinese infanticide, and go from there. I thought about adding some cites, but decided that surely it is common knowledge that this happens. Guess I was wrong. Have you checked out camille’s and Emiliana’s cites in [#1054](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18585489&postcount=1054)? And here are some wikipedia articles, with an overview and references to more reading: > **[Female infanticide in India](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infanticide_in_India)** > > Female infanticide in India has a history spanning centuries. Poverty, the dowry system, births to unmarried women, deformed infants, famine, lack of support services, and maternal illnesses such as postpartum depression are among the causes that have been proposed to explain the phenomenon of female infanticide in India. > Although infanticide has been criminalized in India, it remains an under-reported crime due to the lack of reliable data. In 2010, the National Crime Records Bureau reported... > **[Female infanticide in China](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_infanticide_in_China)** > > China has a history of female infanticide which spans 2,000 years. When Christian missionaries arrived in China in the late sixteenth century, they witnessed newborns being thrown into rivers or onto rubbish piles. In the seventeenth century Matteo Ricci documented that the practice occurred in several of China's provinces and said that the primary reason for the practice was poverty. The practice continued into the 19th century and declined precipitously during the Communist era, but Confucia... > **[Sex-selective abortion](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex-selective_abortion)** > > Sex-selective abortion is the practice of terminating a pregnancy based upon the predicted sex of the infant. The selective abortion of female fetuses is most common where male children are valued over female children, especially in parts of East Asia and South Asia (particularly in countries such as People's Republic of China, India and Pakistan), as well as in the Caucasus, Western Balkans, and to a lesser extent North America. Based on the third National Family and Health Survey, resu Sex-s... Or if you prefer news articles: > **[BBC - Ethics - Abortion: Female infanticide](https://www.bbc.co.uk/ethics/abortion/medical/infanticide_1.shtml)** > > Infanticide is the unlawful killing of very young children. It is found in both indigenous and sophisticated cultures around the world. or even: [Infanticide, Abortion Responsible for 60 Million Girls Missing in Asia | Fox News](http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/06/13/infanticide-abortion-responsible-for-60-million-girls-missing-in-asia.html) if you’re more inclined to trust that one 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1063 "2015-08-09T13:19:33Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Actually it seems to come from the view that fatherhood is entirely a social construct and as such can be controlled, formed and conformed after state ideology. Fatherhood as a social construct is certainly not a flower that has blossomed in any patriarchal garden, and the issue of family and fatherhood is such a central element of existence that having such a hostile male ideology at the heart of it belies any notion of a patriarchy with any power. It does however point to strong and extremely toxic matriarchal tendencies, which I’m sure we all can agree on of course should be opposed just the same as if they were patriarchal. > > Btw. [Air conditioning is literally patriarchy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNH0bmYT7os) Yes. A/C is sexist. Because in professional settings men are required to wear suits and ties. Women often choose to wear skirts and blouses, although they could choose to dress more warmly if they wanted. (Fuck, they could wear wool suits, if they wanted - although, who the hell would do that, if they didn’t have to?) The woman in the video is wearing a sleeveless blouse, and complains about having to take a “jumper” to work (I have not idea what a jumper is - why can’t English people speak English?). Hospitals take extreme precautions to make sure the right baby goes home with the right mother, and are subject to lawsuits if they fuck it up. They make no effort to make sure the right father goes home with the right baby. From the [Wall Street Journal](http://blogs.wsj.com/informedreader/2007/06/21/as-dna-tests-spread-so-do-nasty-paternity-surprises/): > [@](#): > > As genetic testing has become more common, so has an uncomfortable side effect: paternity surprises. Genetics students, reports Steve Olsen in the Atlantic, are commonly taught that 5% to 15% of the men on birth certificates aren’t the biological parents of their children… > > While geneticists in large population studies tend to keep the news to themselves, genetic counselors, who help parents of children with birth defects decide whether they should have more children, generally tell the couple what has happened. In such cases, most counselors inform the mother, but not the father — a practice a vocal minority within the trade disputes. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1064 "2015-08-09T13:47:07Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Usually when I assert a fact, I try to provide evidence: Let’s start with you presenting evidence of Indian and Chinese infanticide, and go from there. We don’t need to provide evidence for all of our assertions. Certain assertions (true or not) function as common knowledge–it takes a statement of doubt from the other party to make it conversationally necessary to provide evidence, in these cases. “In China (and several other places throughout history), girl babies were more often killed than boy babies” functions as common knowledge. It doesn’t make sense for you to ask for evidence right now unless you are actually saying you _doubt_ that it’s true. Do you doubt that it’s true? If so, that’s fine, I just want to be clear on this. But if not, then why are you asking for evidence? ---
**Author:** ![BrightSunshine](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b3f665/32.png) [@BrightSunshine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightSunshine)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1065 "2015-08-09T13:52:15Z")
Why does OP only consider “equal parenting responsibilities” in terms of custody after divorce? Has OP discussed efforts that encourage or allow men to do more parenting, such as paid paternity leaves and changing tables in men’s bathrooms, which have overwhelming support among feminists? Why is OP not concerned that (in 2011) men who live with their children [spend about half as much time](http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/03/14/modern-parenthood-roles-of-moms-and-dads-converge-as-they-balance-work-and-family/) with them as their mothers? After all, (in 2010) [73%](http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2011/06/15/a-tale-of-two-fathers/) of all children live with their fathers. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 1:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1066 "2015-08-09T13:57:46Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by amanset View Post > > But the alternative is, apparently, to treat all men like potential rapists with the likes of mandatory anti-rape seminars. Where are all the other seminars, mandatory or otherwise, demanding that people don’t break other laws? Why should so many men be lectured to about something that they have absolutely zero intention of doing? Isn’t that kind of like treating innocent people like potential criminals? > > > > And whilst we are talking about victim blaming: > > > > [http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ence-men-women](http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...ence-men-women) > > > > [http://jezebel.com/the-top-theories-...y-z-1575320718](http://jezebel.com/the-top-theories-...y-z-1575320718) > > > > The mountains of blogs and newspaper articles regarding that incident and what Jay-Z could have done to cause it sickened me. They far outnumbered the articles that just said straight up “that was assault, Jay-Z is a victim”. > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by LinusK View Post > > I didn’t finish reading the first link, because I stopped here: > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > Solange and Jay-Z: it’s simply not the same if a man is hit by a woman > > > > > > Who knows what prompted Solange Knowles to lash out at her brother-in-law, Jay-Z, in a lift at the Met ball, held back by a bodyguard, while her sister, Beyoncé, passively observed? Was Solange drunk, frustrated about her career, sticking up for her sister – all or none of the above? The recently released (carefully vague) statement from the Knowles-Carter camp about the “unfortunate incident” revealed nothing. However, in my opinion, it would be a mistake to view that video scuffle as in any way comparable, never mind equivalent, to the bulk of male on female violence. > > > > > > Since the incident, there have been relentless debates along the lines of: “If it had been Jay-Z attacking Solange, there would have been an outcry, he’d have been arrested, his career and reputation destroyed – so why does a woman get away with it?” However, this seems painfully simplistic. While there are exceptions, in the majority of cases, FOM violence is different to MOF violence, in myriad ways, ranging from context, scale and intent to self-defence, sexual attacks and death rates. > > > > “We feminists are all about eliminating double standards… unless they benefit us.” > > > > I made it through most of the Jezebel article, and here are the highlights: > > > > > [@](#): > > > > > > The Top Theories About Why Solange Attacked Jay Z > > > > > > 1.) Solange is a nasty drunk. > > > > > > …Could Solange have just been over-served? The fight did take place at the end of the night, which is when people are usually at their drunkest. > > > > > > 2.) Jay Z insulted her as a mother. > > > > > > …If it was something that Jay Z said to her that set Solange off, it would have to be something that really cut to the bone… > > > > > > 3.) She was sticking up for her sister. > > > > > > Beyoncé and Solange have both intimated in the past that Solange is the more outspoken of the two and she doesn’t mind going to bat for her big sister. The most striking thing about the elevator video is how calm Beyoncé appears—as though this is something that has happened before. > > > > > > Why didn’t she try to hold her sister back? Why did she step aside and let her sister high-kick her husband right in the chest? Why is she letting her sister scream at her husband without correcting her? Maybe because Beyoncé thinks Jay deserved Solange’s wrath… > > > > > > Solange’s methods of attack are also interesting, and they indicate that Jay Z did something she felt was pretty reprehensible. She repeatedly tries to kick him in the crotch, she spits on him twice, she throws her handbag at him and when he hands her shoe back to her, she tries to beat him with it.The Top Theories About Why Solange Attacked Jay Z > > > > > > 1.) Solange is a nasty drunk. > > > > > > …Could Solange have just been over-served? The fight did take place at the end of the night, which is when people are usually at their drunkest. > > > > > > 2.) Jay Z insulted her as a mother. > > > > > > …If it was something that Jay Z said to her that set Solange off, it would have to be something that really cut to the bone… > > > > > > 3.) She was sticking up for her sister. > > > > > > Beyoncé and Solange have both intimated in the past that Solange is the more outspoken of the two and she doesn’t mind going to bat for her big sister. The most striking thing about the elevator video is how calm Beyoncé appears—as though this is something that has happened before. > > > > > > Why didn’t she try to hold her sister back? Why did she step aside and let her sister high-kick her husband right in the chest? Why is she letting her sister scream at her husband without correcting her? Maybe because Beyoncé thinks Jay deserved Solange’s wrath… > > > > > > Solange’s methods of attack are also interesting, and they indicate that Jay Z did something she felt was pretty reprehensible. She repeatedly tries to kick him in the crotch, she spits on him twice, she throws her handbag at him and when he hands her shoe back to her, she tries to beat him with it. > > > > There’s not much to say about that, except that this is feminism at it’s core. > > > > Note that it doesn’t say Solange’s methods of attack were reprehensible (kicking him in the balls, spitting on him, beating him with her shoe…) but that Jay Z “must have” done something reprehensible to deserve it. > > > > Imagine anyone anywhere saying a woman “must have deserved it, because of the viciousness of the attack.” > > > > Now, I don’t know anything about Jay Z, but a quick google image search seems to show he’s a strong young man. My guess is he could have knocked Solange on her ass with one good punch to the face. > > > > He didn’t do that. > > > > Why? > > You seem to be agreeing with feminists like **jsgoddess** who believe that it’s wrong to blame Jay-Z for getting attacked by Solange. > > This feminist also agrees – so you agree with multiple feminists on this issue. Good for you. I’m glad you and js agree with me. I would think any sane person would. Unfortunately, The Guardian and Jezebel feminists don’t. Anyway, I’m curious if you have a response to some questions: 1.) Can you imagine a newspaper like the Guardian publishing a piece asking whether a male attacker was “drunk, frustrated about [his] career, sticking up for [his] sister”? 2.) Can you imagine a popular well-known web-site asserting that a female victim of an assault “must have deserved it, because of the viciousness of the attack”? 3.) What do you think the response would be, if the either the Guardian or a website like Jezebel published those kinds of articles? 4.) Why didn’t Jay-Z hit back? ---
**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:** [August 9, 2015, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1067 "2015-08-09T14:03:49Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > I’m glad you and js agree with me. I would think any sane person would. > > Unfortunately, The Guardian and Jezebel feminists don’t. By this you mean a single writer at each publication may not agree, right? Not that every single feminist that works at those places feels the same way, right? It’s not clear to me when you’re making sweeping statements and when you’re critiquing a single writer. > [@](#): > > Anyway, I’m curious if you have a response to some questions: > > 1.) Can you imagine a newspaper like the Guardian publishing a piece asking whether a male attacker was “drunk, frustrated about [his] career, sticking up for [his] sister”? > > 2.) Can you imagine a popular well-known web-site asserting that a female victim of an assault “must have deserved it, because of the viciousness of the attack”? > > 3.) What do you think the response would be, if the either the Guardian or a website like Jezebel published those kinds of articles? > > 4.) Why didn’t Jay-Z hit back? For 1 and 2, maybe. I don’t know – there are tons of crappy publications out there that have had articles that have said stupid things. For 3, I think there would be lots of criticism (just like there seems to be lots of criticism in these cases). For 4, I imagine he didn’t hit back because he didn’t want to hurt Solange, and he didn’t think he was in enough danger to justify risking hurting her. Some questions for you: Do you think it might be possible that there are lots of feminists who worry and advocate against a lot of these things (prison rape and other unfair things) that harm men in patriarchal culture? That your criticisms of feminism may only apply to some feminists and not nearly all? Is it possible that domestic abuse really does disproportionately harm women? Is it possible that far too many young men (from 6% to 1/3rd, depending on the study) in society are okay with rape if it’s not called rape? ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1068 "2015-08-09T14:34:13Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Expectations of aggression and anger, holding in emotions, being “tough”, worse treatment in prisons, must make more money, shouldn’t stay at home, I and more. I don’t think people expect men to be aggressive or angry. If anything the expectation is the reverse: men _are not_ supposed to be aggressive or angry. If they are, they’re likely to be condemned for it. I agree that men are not expected to show emotions: or at the very least, be very selective about which emotions to show. I agree they’re treated worse in prison - and more likely to be put there in the first place. I agree there’s more social pressure on men to make money. I agree that a stay at home dad is likely to get at least a little disrespect thrown his way. (Though not enough to stop him, if that’s what he wants to do - and his wife agrees with it.) “Toughness” is a tricky one. I was a sensitive child, and I learned the hard way the value of being tough. It’s a valuable and important attribute. I would argue - and this of course is just my opinion - that most men want to be tough. They see it as a strength, not a weakness. Anyway, out of the 6, I agree with 4. Are you sure you’re a feminist? ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1069 "2015-08-09T15:05:52Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > I don’t think people expect men to be aggressive or angry. If anything the expectation is the reverse: men _are not_ supposed to be aggressive or angry. If they are, they’re likely to be condemned for it. > > I agree that men are not expected to show emotions: or at the very least, be very selective about which emotions to show. > > I agree they’re treated worse in prison - and more likely to be put there in the first place. > > I agree there’s more social pressure on men to make money. > > I agree that a stay at home dad is likely to get at least a little disrespect thrown his way. (Though not enough to stop him, if that’s what he wants to do - and his wife agrees with it.) > > “Toughness” is a tricky one. I was a sensitive child, and I learned the hard way the value of being tough. It’s a valuable and important attribute. I would argue - and this of course is just my opinion - that most men want to be tough. They see it as a strength, not a weakness. > > Anyway, out of the 6, I agree with 4. Are you sure you’re a feminist? You agree with four or the six points. Are you sure you are not a feminist? ---
**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:** [August 9, 2015, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1070 "2015-08-09T15:06:47Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > I don’t think people expect men to be aggressive or angry. If anything the expectation is the reverse: men _are not_ supposed to be aggressive or angry. If they are, they’re likely to be condemned for it. > > I agree that men are not expected to show emotions: or at the very least, be very selective about which emotions to show. > > I agree they’re treated worse in prison - and more likely to be put there in the first place. > > I agree there’s more social pressure on men to make money. > > I agree that a stay at home dad is likely to get at least a little disrespect thrown his way. (Though not enough to stop him, if that’s what he wants to do - and his wife agrees with it.) > > “Toughness” is a tricky one. I was a sensitive child, and I learned the hard way the value of being tough. It’s a valuable and important attribute. I would argue - and this of course is just my opinion - that most men want to be tough. They see it as a strength, not a weakness. > > Anyway, out of the 6, I agree with 4. Are you sure you’re a feminist? Why do you keep questioning this? Is it really that hard for you to accept that many feminists have different ideas about what feminism is than you do? Yes, I’m a feminist. I’m going to trust my own counsel and the counsel of other feminists for what feminism is. Non-feminists telling feminists what feminism is about is going to be as effective as non-Muslims telling Muslims what Islam is about. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1071 "2015-08-09T15:45:49Z")
While we’re all waiting for \*\*LinusK \*\*to acknowledge how he’s misrepresented his sources, I thought I’d take a look at one of the articles he quoted from in an attempt to change the subject. > [@LinusK](#): > > Finally, if you’re going to look at sexual assault by men, you should look at whether women are doing it too. > > From [Slate](http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/04/male_rape_in_america_a_new_study_reveals_that_men_are_sexually_assaulted.html): > > > [@](#): > > > > When Men Are Raped > > A new study reveals that men are often the victims of sexual assault, and women are often the perpetrators. > > > > By Hanna Rosin > > > > Last year the National Crime Victimization Survey turned up a remarkable statistic. In asking 40,000 households about rape and sexual violence, the survey uncovered that 38 percent of incidents were against men… > > > > For years, the FBI defined forcible rape, for data collecting purposes, as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” Eventually localities began to rebel against that limited gender-bound definition; in 2010 Chicago reported 86,767 cases of rape but used its own broader definition, so the FBI left out the Chicago stats. Finally, in 2012, the FBI revised its definition and focused on penetration, with no mention of female (or force)… > > > > …the 2010 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, for which the Centers for Disease Control invented a category of sexual violence called “being made to penetrate.” This definition includes victims who were forced to penetrate someone else with their own body parts, either by physical force or coercion, or when the victim was drunk or high or otherwise unable to consent. **When those cases were taken into account, the rates of nonconsensual sexual contact basically equalized, with 1.270 million women and 1.267 million men claiming to be victims of sexual violence…** > > > > The final outrage in Stemple and Meyer’s paper involves inmates, who aren’t counted in the general statistics at all. In the last few years, the BJS did two studies in adult prisons, jails, and juvenile facilities. The surveys were excellent because they afforded lots of privacy and asked questions using very specific, informal, and graphic language. (“Did another inmate use physical force to make you give or receive a blow job?”) Those surveys turned up the opposite of what we generally think is true. Women were more likely to be abused by fellow female inmates, and men by guards, and many of those guards were female. **For example, of juveniles reporting staff sexual misconduct, 89 percent were boys reporting abuse by a female staff member. In total, inmates reported an astronomical 900,000 incidents of sexual abuse.** (Bolding is **LinusK** ’s.) First of all, the author of this piece is another feminist journalist, Hanna Rosin. And she’s not just _any_ feminist, she’s one of the feminists who participated in the “Are Men Obsolete?” debate that **LinusK** [claimed](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=18547991&postcount=539) that someone else had linked to in this thread when actually he was the one to link to it in a [different thread](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=761007). (Rosin was on the [“pro” side](http://www.munkdebates.com/debates/gender-in-the-21st-century).) Given what a big impression this debate made on him, it’s strange that **LinusK** apparently did not recognize Rosin’s name or realize that she’s a feminist. In the quoted passage above, **LinusK** ’s use of ellipses allows him to skip over most reference to Lara Stemple, who is pretty prominent in the original article. She is director of the UCLA Health and Human Rights Law Project, and has done a lot of work on prison rape and sexual victimization of men. I don’t know if Stemple identifies as a feminist, but she did publish a piece titled “HBO’s _Oz_ and the Fight Against Prison Rape” in a book titled _[Third Wave Feminism and Television](https://books.google.com/books?id=f2ZjFBSx8rEC&lpg=PA166&ots=y_aqaSLN8V&dq=feminism%20%22Lara%20Stemple%22&pg=PA166#v=onepage&q=feminism%20%22Lara%20Stemple%22&f=false)_. But to be fair, **LinusK** ’s selected quotes do at least mention Stemple’s name, which is more than he did for Karen DeCrow when quoting from an article that was a memorial piece _about_ DeCrow. However, **LinusK** did _not_ quote the sentence immediately before the one beginning “The final outrage in Stemple and Meyer’s paper…”, which is odd since this sentence deals directly with his stated topic, the question of how much sexual assault is committed by women: > [@Hanna Rosin](#): > > A recent analysis of BJS data, for example, turned up that [46 percent of male victims](http://jmm.sagepub.com/content/12/3/275.abstract) reported a female perpetrator. The linked study is behind a paywall, but I have access to the full text and I’ll quote from it here: > [@Karen G. Weiss](#): > > It is most important that while 99 percent of women are sexually victimized by men, only 54 percent of men are victimized by other men, with the remaining 46 percent of men victimized by women (?2 = 341.274, df = 1, p \< .001). Now, the point both Rosin and Weiss are making is that a non-negligible number of sexual assaults are committed by women, and that this challenges stereotypes about sexual assault. Perhaps this was **LinusK** ’s point as well – it’s difficult to tell, since (as usual) he said very little before posting a lengthy quote copied from somewhere else. But if his point was just that some significant number of sexual assaults are committed by women – something I don’t think anyone here has denied – why didn’t he include this number? Why did he instead choose to quote (and bold!) the passage about how a large majority of sexual assaults reported by inmates in juvenile detention facilities involved female staff members? It sure looks to me like this was selective quoting intended to give the impression that women are at least as likely to commit sexual assault as men, when the article actually only says this of some specific types of sexual assault. According to the cited Weiss study, most sexual assaults in general are committed by men, with men making up the vast majority of assailants when the victim is female and a small majority when the victim is male. If **LinusK** bothers to respond to this post at all then I suspect it will consist mostly of a bunch of quotes from somewhere else with some brief claim that he was just providing evidence that women do commit sexual assault. Perhaps that was truly his intention, although personally I doubt it. But I have an even stronger suspicion that he will never acknowledge that his own cite is also evidence that feminists such as Hanna Rosin do indeed talk about prison rape and other sexual violence against men and are willing to recognize that women commit sexual assault. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1072 "2015-08-09T16:08:36Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > By this you mean a single writer at each publication may not agree, right? Not that every single feminist that works at those places feels the same way, right? It’s not clear to me when you’re making sweeping statements and when you’re critiquing a single writer. > > For 1 and 2, maybe. I don’t know – there are tons of crappy publications out there that have had articles that have said stupid things. > > For 3, I think there would be lots of criticism (just like there seems to be lots of criticism in these cases). > > For 4, I imagine he didn’t hit back because he didn’t want to hurt Solange, and he didn’t think he was in enough danger to justify risking hurting her. > > Some questions for you: > > Do you think it might be possible that there are lots of feminists who worry and advocate against a lot of these things (prison rape and other unfair things) that harm men in patriarchal culture? That your criticisms of feminism may only apply to some feminists and not nearly all? Is it possible that domestic abuse really does disproportionately harm women? Is it possible that far too many young men (from 6% to 1/3rd, depending on the study) in society are okay with rape if it’s not called rape? Depends on what you mean by “lots”. What I see is slutwalks and shirtgate and feminists who conflate the bad behavior of a minority of men with men in general - while simultaneously ignoring or even suppressing evidence of women behaving badly. The agenda seems to be “women are good - men are bad.” Now it’s entirely possible that part of what I see is filtered through the media. Obviously, thousands of women slutwalking is going to get more media attention than however many feminists are advocating against prison rape - and I agree some feminists are advocating against it. Something I didn’t know when I started this thread. (Although some of them seem to think prison rape has something to do with “patriarchy” - which is bullshit. It happens because nobody gives a shit about men who are in prison.) I certainly agree that not all criticisms I’ve made apply to all feminists. The problem is that feminism is a movement that refuses to agree about what they agree about. If you want to say that feminism is about whatever anyone who calls him/herself a feminist says it’s about, that’s fine. But you shouldn’t expect that to stop people from calling out feminists who claim to be about equality, when they’re not. Or to feminists who are privilege-blind when it comes to their own privileges, but are constantly on the look-out for any little thing to complain about. Or to feminists who are openly hostile towards men, but hyper-sensitive about any criticism of women. Or to feminists who immediately react to any criticism of feminism with the shameful practice of labeling critics as people “who can’t get laid.” Blah blah blah. I’ve already been over this a thousand times. Anyway, the point is the fact that **some feminists** are not like that is not a reason to not criticize **feminist who are**. > [@](#): > > Is it possible that domestic abuse really does disproportionately harm women? What I’ve said is that men and women are approximately equally likely to engage in domestic violence. In the minority of cases that result in severe injury, women are more likely to be injured than men. I’ve also said, I think, that one of the reasons women hit men, is that they think they can get away with it: the man won’t hit back, the police won’t come, and if they do come, they probably won’t arrest her. If there was one single thing that would reduce domestic violence, it would be to teach women it’s not ok to hit a man. It’s not funny, it’s not “empowering”: it’s just violent and abusive. > [@](#): > > Is it possible that far too many young men (from 6% to 1/3rd, depending on the study) in society are okay with rape if it’s not called rape? I think any percent of men being OK with rape is too many. Having said that, I think the 1/3 number is bogus, and even the 6-7% studies were problematic. At least one question was poorly worded, and it was the one that put 80% of them in there. Similarly any number of people willing to commit any serious crime is too many. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1073 "2015-08-09T17:19:45Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Why do you keep questioning this? Is it really that hard for you to accept that many feminists have different ideas about what feminism is than you do? > > Yes, I’m a feminist. I’m going to trust my own counsel and the counsel of other feminists for what feminism is. Non-feminists telling feminists what feminism is about is going to be as effective as non-Muslims telling Muslims what Islam is about. Actually, I was being facetious. I realize it doesn’t translate well, and maybe it was just a bad joke. I probably should have put a 🙂 after it. In truth, you’re the most reasonable, and least caustic feminist in the thread - which is why I make a special effort to respond to your posts. As far as Muslims are concerned, I think it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize Islam (or Christianity, or Scientology, or whatever). That’s not what this thread is about. But I don’t think you have to be a Muslim to criticize Islam, or a Scientologist to criticize Scientology. Furthermore, I’d argue that there are plenty of self-identified Christians who don’t know much about Christianity: “If you think the Pope is too liberal, wait til you meet Jesus.” The difference is there’s a central text for Christianity. There’s no central text for feminism. ---
**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:** [August 9, 2015, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1074 "2015-08-09T17:38:55Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Actually, I was being facetious. I realize it doesn’t translate well, and maybe it was just a bad joke. I probably should have put a 🙂 after it. > > In truth, you’re the most reasonable, and least caustic feminist in the thread - which is why I make a special effort to respond to your posts. > > As far as Muslims are concerned, I think it’s perfectly legitimate to criticize Islam (or Christianity, or Scientology, or whatever). That’s not what this thread is about. But I don’t think you have to be a Muslim to criticize Islam, or a Scientologist to criticize Scientology. Furthermore, I’d argue that there are plenty of self-identified Christians who don’t know much about Christianity: “If you think the Pope is too liberal, wait til you meet Jesus.” The difference is there’s a central text for Christianity. There’s no central text for feminism. Feel free to criticize feminism, or specific aspects of feminism. But that’s not the only thing you’re doing – you’re also trying to _tell me what feminism is_. I’m not going to just accept that your version of feminism is more accurate than mine. I already know that there are feminists I disagree with on certain issues. That doesn’t mean that their feminism is more true or pure than mine, it just means that we might disagree on the best way to achieve equal treatment by law and by society for women and men. As far as the broader thread, you’d get very little push-back if you took individual statements from individual people and challenged those assertions _without attributing them to feminism as a whole_. If you say “this person said this, and I think that is wrong/stupid/false/evil because xyz”, then that might be a good discussion. But you’re saying (or at least this is how I’m understanding you) “this person said this, and this person identifies as a feminist, therefore feminism is wrong/stupid/false/evil…”. That’s not logical, and not rational. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1075 "2015-08-09T18:43:24Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > [Lara Stemple] is director of the UCLA Health and Human Rights Law Project, and has done a lot of work on prison rape and sexual victimization of men. I don’t know if Stemple identifies as a feminist, but she did publish a piece titled “HBO’s _Oz_ and the Fight Against Prison Rape” in a book titled _[Third Wave Feminism and Television](https://books.google.com/books?id=f2ZjFBSx8rEC&lpg=PA166&ots=y_aqaSLN8V&dq=feminism%20%22Lara%20Stemple%22&pg=PA166#v=onepage&q=feminism%20%22Lara%20Stemple%22&f=false)_. A little more searching turned up an article on SciDevNet (“[View on Gender: Sexual violence affects men too](http://www.scidev.net/global/gender/analysis-blog/sexual-violence-affects-men-too.html)”) where Stemple is quoted as referring to herself as a feminist: > [@SciDevNet](#): > > Stemple says: “When you have these really excellent studies showing that the numbers of males and females experiencing sexual violence are not that different, it then becomes really hard to justify why there is a constant emphasis on women and girls [in international law]. As a feminist, I think excluding men can be really problematic — because it hits this drumbeat about women and girls as victims all the time.” ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_of\_Words](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f6c823/32.png) [@Jack\_of\_Words](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_of_Words)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1076 "2015-08-09T19:15:18Z")
All this chitter-chatter about DV, may I ask, what does it matter (to anyone purportedly interested in equality) what genitalia anybody (attacker, mutual attacker, or pacific victim) has? ‘This study’, ‘that survey’, as if any incident of intimate partner violence wasn’t always appalling for any victim - man, woman, straight, gay, trans, cis. Who is it who is concerned with the genitalia of the attacker or the presumed social role of the victim? Is it not possible to stand against D.V., as an appalling thing, _regardless of gender_? It doesn’t strike me as an argument for any kind of equality to concentrate on which gender does it most. Nobody investigates which race or sexual orientation does it most (we’d soon spot you as a bigot if you tried _that_!). We know that neither gender does it exclusively, so we also know that it’s not a function of biological gender or even of social expectation of gender roles (except insofar as it’s considerably more difficult for a man to report, or be believed, or receive empathy). So what are you bigots up to, when you insist it’s something men do to women? Whoops, answered my own question there… ---
**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:** [August 9, 2015, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1077 "2015-08-09T19:24:24Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > All this chitter-chatter about DV, may I ask, what does it matter (to anyone purportedly interested in equality) what genitalia anybody (attacker, mutual attacker, or pacific victim) has? In some places there needs to be additional resources in order to provide shelters for male victims of domestic violence AND the notion that real men can’t be victims domestic violence must be fought against as pernicious sexism. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1078 "2015-08-09T19:35:59Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > Nobody investigates which race or sexual orientation does it most (we’d soon spot you as a bigot if you tried _that_!). I guess the CDC and the Bureau of Justice are bigoted then, because that information is in their reports, as well as gender. Many other studies include it as well. The links have been posted on this thread more than once. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Chance](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jonathan_chance/32/701_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Chance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jonathan_Chance)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 7:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1079 "2015-08-09T19:57:21Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > So what are you bigots up to, when you insist it’s something men do to women? Whoops, answered my own question there… That’s enough. Warning issued. If you wish to continue posting here at the SDMB I suggest you learn to control yourself and live within the rules. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_of\_Words](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f6c823/32.png) [@Jack\_of\_Words](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_of_Words)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2015, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1080 "2015-08-09T20:00:50Z")
> [@camille](#): > > I guess the CDC and the Bureau of Justice are bigoted then, because that information is in their reports, as well as gender. Many other studies include it as well. The links have been posted on this thread more than once. > > Try again. Well, as pointless as it may be to ‘try again’ to get a point across to a feminist, why do you insist on introducing gender to a situation that applies equally appallingly to any individual regardless of their genitalia or the genitalia of their attacker (DV occurs in lesbian relationships)? In case you’ve a) forgotten, b) never notice or c) don’t care, I’m not American (amazing how often that happens on the world wide intertubes…), so I can’t begin to answer for the CDC and the BofJ - no, I can begin to answer: most men are the opposite of misogynists. We exist in a gynocentric, gynophilic culture. We all are trained to respond to the commanding voice of our mother (oh, you should have seen the face on the misandrist who tried that on me once). Feminists tell the CDC and the BJ (fnar!) that gender matters, and off they go. But you tell me (although you didn’t at your first opportunity), if it isn’t only men, and if it’s equally appalling whoever it happens to, why is gender a concern for feminists discussing DV? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=53) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=55)