# 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:** 56
**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 10, 2015, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1101 "2015-08-10T01:35:13Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > If so, why is it, do you think, that there is such a constant emphasis on women and girls, rather than men and boys? I think it’s because patriarchal culture has emphasized that young men and boys are and should be constantly aroused and up for sex, and therefore can’t be victimized by women, and that only sissies or homosexuals are weak or unresistant enough to ‘victimized’ by other men, and they probably enjoyed it anyway. So the prison rape jokes, dismissal of female-teacher statutory rape, and similar phenomena are examples of how patriarchal culture harms men. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 5:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1102 "2015-08-10T05:33:51Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Then consider [wolves](http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/mammals/wolf/): > > > [@](#): > > > > Wolfpacks are established according to a strict hierarchy, with a dominant male at the top and his mate not far behind. Usually this male and female are the only animals of the pack to breed. All of a pack’s adults help to care for young pups by bringing them food and watching them while others hunt. > > Most wolves, at any given time, do not breed. Instead they use their resources to care for the pups of the alpha male and female. If instinctual altruism is not why they do it, what is? Two things to consider: 1. Wolves exhibit [_obligate monogamy_](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/857268): Obligate monogamy appears to occur when a solitary female cannot rear a litter without aid from conspecifics, but the carrying capacity of the habitat is insufficient to allow more than one female to breed simultaneously within the same home range. 1. Think about this situation. In a simple model, a pack consists of an alpha male and female (the parents), and the betas (older siblings bred from those alphas), and then the youngest pups (the latest litter from the alphas). They are a family; they are [_kin_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection): Kin selection is the evolutionary strategy that favours the reproductive success of an organism’s relatives, even at a cost to the organism’s own survival and reproduction. Kin altruism is altruistic behaviour whose evolution is driven by kin selection. Kin selection is an instance of inclusive fitness, which combines the number of offspring produced with the number an individual can produce by supporting others, such as siblings. Kin selection is not the same thing as group selection, where natural selection acts on the group as a whole. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1103 "2015-08-10T17:44:10Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think it’s because patriarchal culture has emphasized that young men and boys are and should be constantly aroused and up for sex, and therefore can’t be victimized by women, and that only sissies or homosexuals are weak or unresistant enough to ‘victimized’ by other men, and they probably enjoyed it anyway. > > So the prison rape jokes, dismissal of female-teacher statutory rape, and similar phenomena are examples of how patriarchal culture harms men. Well, maybe we need to talk about what “patriarchy” means, then. Does it mean “any aspect of culture that’s harmful”? Or does it mean something else? Does it assert that feminism has had no cultural influence over the past 65+ years? Or that that the only influence feminism has had has been good, not bad? Does it assert that women - despite mothering however many billions of girls and boys over the course of history - has had no influence on culture, historically? ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1104 "2015-08-10T17:47:47Z")
> [@camille](#): > > Two things to consider: > > 1. Wolves exhibit [_obligate monogamy_](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/857268): > > Obligate monogamy appears to occur when a solitary female cannot rear a litter without aid from conspecifics, but the carrying capacity of the habitat is insufficient to allow more than one female to breed simultaneously within the same home range. > > 1. Think about this situation. In a simple model, a pack consists of an alpha male and female (the parents), and the betas (older siblings bred from those alphas), and then the youngest pups (the latest litter from the alphas). They are a family; they are [_kin_](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection): > > Kin selection is the evolutionary strategy that favours the reproductive success of an organism’s relatives, even at a cost to the organism’s own survival and reproduction. Kin altruism is altruistic behaviour whose evolution is driven by kin selection. Kin selection is an instance of inclusive fitness, which combines the number of offspring produced with the number an individual can produce by supporting others, such as siblings. > > Kin selection is not the same thing as group selection, where natural selection acts on the group as a whole. Ok. So for the sake of the argument, let’s say wolves are a bad example. Are saying that wolves are a bad example, or that group selection is not a thing? ---
**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 10, 2015, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1105 "2015-08-10T17:57:31Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Does it assert that women - despite mothering however many billions of girls and boys over the course of history - has had no influence on culture, historically? Women can buy into all of the bad aspects of a patriarchy. See, for example, Ann Coulter’s “women shouldn’t have the vote” bs. Women have often been the enforcers of rigid gender norms against other women and men. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1106 "2015-08-10T18:52:12Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Women can buy into all of the bad aspects of a patriarchy. See, for example, Ann Coulter’s “women shouldn’t have the vote” bs. Women have often been the enforcers of rigid gender norms against other women and men. The whole idea of The Patriarchy is bullshit and one of the reasons modern feminism is such a joke. It doesn’t exists as a force any more than The Matriarchy. Or The BORG. In fact if one substitudes “The Patriarchy” with “The Borg” when reading feminists it instantaneously makes much more sense. One of the things that irritate me when feminists take on men’s rights is that they tend to like to frame everything and everybody as a question of being victims. And I as a man have absolutely zero interest in being protrayed or assuming the identity of a victim. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1107 "2015-08-10T19:05:09Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > And I as a man have absolutely zero interest in being protrayed or assuming the identity of a victim. cough Go on. Tell me about that. ---
**Author:** ![Emiliana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f0a364/32.png) [@Emiliana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Emiliana)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1108 "2015-08-10T19:17:37Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > The whole idea of The Patriarchy is bullshit and one of the reasons modern feminism is such a joke. It doesn’t exists as a force any more than The Matriarchy. Or The BORG. In fact if one substitudes “The Patriarchy” with “The Borg” when reading feminists it instantaneously makes much more sense. > > One of the things that irritate me when feminists take on men’s rights is that they tend to like to frame everything and everybody as a question of being victims. And I as a man have absolutely zero interest in being protrayed or assuming the identity of a victim. I’m hopping off my white horse as we speak. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1109 "2015-08-10T19:28:18Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > cough Go on. Tell me about that. > [@Emiliana](#): > > I’m hopping off my white horse as we speak. Two quality posts right there. The thing about SDMB is that to read the occasional interesting reply you always have to wade through oceans of uninteresting chatter by insignificant people that insist on using their five minutes of fame to post innate nonsense. They’re like Buffer People. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1110 "2015-08-10T19:30:25Z")
No, no, let’s stick to the interesting stuff by non-buffer heroes like yourself. You were saying that as a man, you can’t ever see yourself as a victim, and that’s why the patriarchy is some made up Star Trek garbage? ---
**Author:** ![Emiliana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f0a364/32.png) [@Emiliana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Emiliana)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1111 "2015-08-10T19:38:46Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Two quality posts right there. The thing about SDMB is that to read the occasional interesting reply you always have to wade through oceans of uninteresting chatter by insignificant people that insist on using their five minutes of fame to post innate nonsense. They’re like Buffer People. My most abject apologies. I had no idea that you were attempting a serious argument.: I shall take my innate nonsense elsewhere.🙂 ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1112 "2015-08-10T19:39:47Z")
> [@camille](#): > > You’re kidding, right? It was your cite. Why are you citing a source you yourself don’t believe? Go back and read the post again. If you still can’t figure it out, I’ll explain it to you. > [@](#): > > Why should we believe that? You should believe whatever you want. > [@](#): > > Maybe the part I quoted is true (I do have the actual study available), and the things you quoted are the lies. > > Maybe they’re just putting that out there to make anti-feminists angry. I’ve been accused of quoting too much from sources, and of quoting too little. Of posting too often, and of not posting enough. I’ve been attacked for responding to personal attacks - which have pervasive - and for ignoring them. Basically, anything and everything to try to make the thread about me, rather than the topic of the thread. I’ll file this on one more attempt. > [@](#): > > Some people do that you know: they like to get people riled up, so when they give up on debating and resort to attacks in return, you can tell yourself that you hit a nerve; makes it seem like there’s some truth to what you’re saying about them. > > I’m pretty sure I heard someone mention that in a video somewhere; I suspect you did as well. but I’m guessing you’ll ignore what I’m saying because I’m a feminist. > > Because you know… feminists are bad. No: feminism is bad. It’s a poorly thought-out, hypocritical, and self-serving ideology. Which isn’t to say there aren’t bad feminists; or good ones for that matter. But this thread is about attacking an ideology, not a person. ---
**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 10, 2015, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1113 "2015-08-10T19:47:41Z")
If a woman is killed by a serial killer, she’s a victim. If a man is killed, he’s a what? Heroic non-survivor? Dead but totally non-victim male person? What about kids? If it’s a boy is he a proto-man death sufferer? ---
**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 10, 2015, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1114 "2015-08-10T19:48:32Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Well, maybe we need to talk about what “patriarchy” means, then. Does it mean “any aspect of culture that’s harmful”? Or does it mean something else? I’ll quote [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriarchy): “Patriarchy is a social system in which males hold primary power, predominate in roles of political leadership, moral authority, social privilege and control of property; in the domain of the family, fathers or father-figures hold authority over women and children.” Some aspects of patriarchal culture no longer exist or are no longer prominent, but many aspects still exist. I believe that most negative things in our culture that are tied to gender roles and sexuality are due to patriarchal culture. > [@](#): > > Does it assert that feminism has had no cultural influence over the past 65+ years? Or that that the only influence feminism has had has been good, not bad? No, to the first question. I don’t know about the second, probably because it is so broad. I think in general the influence of feminism has been very good, but I’m open to the possibility that some bad things in wider society were caused by feminists. > [@](#): > > Does it assert that women - despite mothering however many billions of girls and boys over the course of history - has had no influence on culture, historically? No. Through most of history, and most of culture, many and probably most women supported patriarchal culture. Today, many women still do. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1115 "2015-08-10T20:24:25Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > 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_. If I said feminists **never** did things like DeCrow, I humbly admit my mistake. It is clear that some feminists do things like DeCrow (like DeCrow herself, for example). I still maintain that DeCrow is not typical of the feminist movement, as the article itself pointed out. > [@](#): > > 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. That’s a good thing. NOW, the single largest feminist organization, is against shared parenting. If more feminists advocated against NOW’s position, I think that would be wonderful. If you want me to say it again, I’ll say it again: some feminists are doing the right thing. The problem is there’s not enough of them. > [@](#): > > 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. I deny being “deceptive”. I posted the links to the sources in hope that people would read them. You’re free to go on thinking I’m deceptive, if you like. ---
**Author:** ![Emiliana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f0a364/32.png) [@Emiliana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Emiliana)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1116 "2015-08-10T20:40:32Z")
Serious question for LinusK: What do you believe should be the most important \*goal \*in the making of child custody arrangements? I’m not asking what the arrangements should be (e.g. 50/50 physical custody, etc.), but rather what you see as the most important outcome to be achieved. ---
**Author:** ![Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f475e1/32.png) [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jimmy_Chitwood)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1117 "2015-08-10T20:44:20Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > That’s a good thing. NOW, the single largest feminist organization, is against shared parenting. If more feminists advocated against NOW’s position, I think that would be wonderful. If you want me to say it again, I’ll say it again: some feminists are doing the right thing. The problem is there’s not enough of them. I have several times pointed out to you that you are mischaracterizing this to such an extent that it isn’t even coherent. NOW is not “against shared parenting.” NOW opposed statutorily mandated 50/50 custody. They’re not remotely the same thing. ---
**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 10, 2015, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1118 "2015-08-10T20:46:05Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > If I said feminists **never** did things like DeCrow, I humbly admit my mistake. It is clear that some feminists do things like DeCrow (like DeCrow herself, for example). > > \ > > If you want me to say it again, I’ll say it again: some feminists are doing the right thing. This is more progress than I was expecting, honestly. ---
**Author:** ![Emiliana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f0a364/32.png) [@Emiliana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Emiliana)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1119 "2015-08-10T20:56:55Z")
> [@Jimmy\_Chitwood](#): > > I have several times pointed out to you that you are mischaracterizing this to such an extent that it isn’t even coherent. > > NOW is not “against shared parenting.” NOW opposed statutorily mandated 50/50 custody. They’re not remotely the same thing. The absurdity of legally-mandated 50/50 custody is so blatantly obvious that its proponents would seem to have no familiarity whatsoever with the daily lives, emotions, and needs of actual children, let alone the concept of the best interests of the child. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2015, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1120 "2015-08-10T22:23:53Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Ok. So for the sake of the argument, let’s say wolves are a bad example. Are saying that wolves are a bad example, or that group selection is not a thing? Wolves are a bad example. As for [group selection](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/books/review/the-neighborhood-project-by-david-sloan-wilson-book-review.html?_r=3&pagewanted=all): Group selection isn’t widely accepted by evolutionists for several reasons. First, it’s not an efficient way to select for traits, like altruistic behavior, that are supposed to be detrimental to the individual but good for the group. Groups divide to form other groups much less often than organisms reproduce to form other organisms, so group selection for altruism would be unlikely to override the tendency of each group to quickly lose its altruists through natural selection favoring cheaters. Further, we simply have little evidence that selection on groups has promoted the evolution of any trait. Finally, other, more plausible evolutionary forces, like direct selection on individuals for reciprocal support, could have made us prosocial. While I wouldn’t say it’s “not a thing”, it’s still not a strong enough theory to use as a basis for your claim that “men are disposable”, especially since there is strong evidence that refutes it (e.g., female infanticide, which continues to this day). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=55) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=57)