# 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:** 58
**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 11, 2015, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1141 "2015-08-11T19:25:24Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > There is a thing called [Women are Wonderful Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CWomen_are_wonderful%E2%80%9D_effect) which seems to be a real thing. It’s a real thing. I’ve commented on it several times in this thread. It is an example of pernicious sexism that can badly hurt men. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1142 "2015-08-11T19:26:54Z")
> [@Rune](#): > > Perhaps the views are different in China/India and The West. Meaning of course that it’s not inherent, but still might be a thing in Western culture that women are seen as more valuable and less expendable than men. There is a thing called [Women are Wonderful Effect](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E2%80%9CWomen_are_wonderful%E2%80%9D_effect) which seems to be a real thing. According to a [Gallup poll](http://www.gallup.com/poll/148187/americans-prefer-boys-girls-1941.aspx): **Americans Prefer Boys to Girls, Just as They Did in 1941 Men tend to want boys; women are divided in their gender preferences** The real-world implications of gender-preference attitudes in some countries around the world are profound. A recent review article in the Philadelphia Inquirer pointed out that the preference for boys over girls is beginning to tilt the gender balance worldwide, a demographic shift that will have major consequences in the decades ahead. > [@Rune](#): > > And I have yet to see an article emphasising that men were killed as an especial horrendous thing. _“An earthquake hit San Francisco. 20 people were killed, including men and children.”_ Odd how that sounds so outlandish and silly. Perhaps it’s because the phrase “20 _people_ were killed” refers to men as the _default_ “people”, and it’s an old convention from a time when it needed to be emphasized that women and children were involved as well. ---
**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 11, 2015, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1143 "2015-08-11T20:00:02Z")
> [@Gedd](#): > > How is this still going on? > > Most feminists simply think men and women should be treated equally. > > There are some outliers, just like with any group (See: Christianity and the Westboro Baptist Church or the KKK) Well, perhaps one of the reasons it’s still going on is that everyone recognises the existence of ‘outliers’ of various unpalatable sorts, but nobody is prepared (or able) to either back up the claim that ‘most’ feminists are innocuous, or indeed to demonstrate that feminism in any form is innocuous. You may be the first to claim that feminists want gender equality (so do egalitarians, with the bonus that you won’t find a racist egalitarian but feminism allows for all manner of prejudices) - most everyone else has said it’s about ‘equality’ _for women_ (they’re the ones so very concerned about those terrible MRAs, who want equality for men as well, since there’s no other form of equality). By the by, if you want to draw a parallel with christianity (or any other faith), proclaiming oneself to be a-theist is only a problem for a few nutjobs, whereas proclaiming oneself an a-feminist is…oh, hang on, there’s no difference… ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 8:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1144 "2015-08-11T20:17:33Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > I do encounter women who say “I’m strong and independent, but I’m not a feminist.” > > Why? Each one has her own reason, but they are average people, going with the flow (no Donald Trump-like pun intended). If they live in a college town in the Northeast or Northwest, they’re more likely to be socially comfortable calling themselves feminists. Here in the suburbs of Atlanta, that would make them outliers. There’s a lot of people here who will say they aren’t religious, but won’t declare “I am an atheist/agnostic.” > > (Although, you can imagine an “I’m not a feminist” Texan woman taking less shit of her boyfriend that an Oregon-apathy feminist, in practical day-to-day terms.) > > Even more harsh than accusing them of being sheep is the assumption that they’ve made what’s called the Patriarchal Bargain. When they’re young and hot, they see more rewards from the traditional entitlements granted to (mostly young and hot) women than the sort of rights for which they have to include their own efforts: actually going through college, putting up with the corporate crap, etc. And the rights that they inherited from earlier generations of feminism, like birth control? That’s taken for granted. For a lot of youngsters, I suspect it is simply that they take most or all of “equality feminism” totally for granted. In their minds, “feminist” means “difference feminist” - particularly of the sort that held that women had values or ways of knowing that were, basically, superior to those of men. When they say stuff like “I’m strong and Independent, but not a feminist”, they likely mean ‘I’m not what I think the term ‘feminist’ imeans - namely, a ‘difference feminist’. But of course, I think women ought to be morally and legally equal to men - that just goes without saying’. > **[Difference feminism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_feminism)** > > Difference feminism is a term developed during the equality-versus-difference debate in American feminism to describe the view that men and women are different, but that no value judgment can be placed upon them and both sexes have equal moral status as persons. > Most strains of difference feminism did not argue that there was a biological, inherent, ahistorical, or otherwise "essential" link between womanhood and traditionally feminine values, habits of mind (often called "ways of knowing"), or ... ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1145 "2015-08-11T20:38:02Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > For a lot of youngsters, I suspect it is simply that they take most or all of “equality feminism” totally for granted. > > In their minds, “feminist” means “difference feminist” - particularly of the sort that held that women had values or ways of knowing that were, basically, superior to those of men. When they say stuff like “I’m strong and Independent, but not a feminist”, they likely mean ‘I’m not what I think the term ‘feminist’ imeans - namely, a ‘difference feminist’. But of course, I think women ought to be morally and legally equal to men - that just goes without saying’. > > [Difference feminism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_feminism) I suspect you are dead right. ---
**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 11, 2015, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1146 "2015-08-11T21:05:08Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > For a lot of youngsters, I suspect it is simply that they take most or all of “equality feminism” totally for granted. > > In their minds, “feminist” means “difference feminist” - particularly of the sort that held that women had values or ways of knowing that were, basically, superior to those of men. When they say stuff like “I’m strong and Independent, but not a feminist”, they likely mean ‘I’m not what I think the term ‘feminist’ imeans - namely, a ‘difference feminist’. But of course, I think women ought to be morally and legally equal to men - that just goes without saying’. > > [Difference feminism - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Difference_feminism) That makes sense to me. Difference feminism just looks like good, old-fashioned sexism to me. ---
**Author:** ![camille](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/22d042/32.png) [@camille](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/camille)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1147 "2015-08-11T21:26:08Z")
I guess it falls into line with something like this: [**Fox News Up In Arms Over Target’s Plan To Remove Gender Labels From Some Children’s Products**](http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/11/fox-news-up-in-arms-over-targets-plan-to-remove/204882) …and I think you’d agree with me that, boys and girl are different. And that there are naturally different interests. When you go in there, the barbies are there, the little boys want the war toys or a gun, or the action figures. Video game interests are different. That is a real thing and it exists… And also the blurring of the notion that there are gender differences, not just with children, but also between men and women and I like those differences. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2015, 9:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1148 "2015-08-11T21:33:40Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > You may be the first to claim that feminists want gender equality (so do egalitarians, with the bonus that you won’t find a racist egalitarian but feminism allows for all manner of prejudices) Actually, racist egalitarians are certainly possible. Someone who considers themselves an egalitarian might well believe that everyone should be\* treated\* equally without regards to differences, but that all people are not _actually_ equal. Or, alternatively, they might believe that everyone is equal in themselves but that they should not be treated equally. There’s a lot of wiggle room there. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2015, 12:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1149 "2015-08-12T00:15:45Z")
> [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by LinusK View Post > > 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: **“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. [Bolding mine.] Earlier you said (1101): > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by LinusK View Post > > 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. The Wikipedia definition doesn’t say anything about statutory rape or prison jokes. Why do you blame them on patriarchy? The definition (to condense it a bit) says that patriarchy is about men having power and privilege. Assuming for the moment that men have or had power and privilege, why do they use it to send men (but not women) to war? Why was the Federal definition of rape, "the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will,” until 2012? Why is rape of a woman one of the harshest punished crimes there is? Why are men more likely to be penalized, and more harshly penalized, at every level of the criminal justice system? Why have women’s health centers been federally funded since 1970, while men’s health centers are not even a thing? In other words, if patriarchy is all about giving power and privileges to men, why have men used all that power to privilege women? > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > 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. Is patriarchal culture the same as patriarchy, or something different? And if women have supported patriarchal culture, is it possible there was something in for them? To put it bluntly, (although this is certainly not part of the Wikipedia definition) is it possible a central tenet of “patriarchy” was putting women’s safety and well-being ahead of men’s? ---
**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:** [August 12, 2015, 12:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1150 "2015-08-12T00:36:24Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > That makes sense to me. Difference feminism just looks like good, old-fashioned sexism to me. Well, I doubt Jane Q Citizen has really studied the feminist theoretician’s playbook, but just adopt the average person’s paradox of live and let live but look out for number one. We’ve all heard the many iterations of the “that’s different!” argument. Agreed: a 140 lb. woman beating on her 210 boyfriend is different than a 210 man destroying a 140 lb. person. But you tell me: have you ever known a woman who hit her man who also didn’t hit her kids? And she had a rationalization for that, too. “Don’t judge me! I’m responsible for them 24 hours a day!” What Sam Kinnison and Bill Burr and the rest of the he-man women haters club spout off about isn’t feminist dogma. Most of it is as dry and boring as a DVR installation manual written by Noam Chomsky. What they hate are the abusers in the Patriarchial Bargain camp. They’ll play the feminist card when it suits them, but if they see a better angle by playing the Damsel in Distress then that’ll go that route. They expect the same pay for the same work, but also expect men to make the first move and pick up the first check. And if any other women queers the sweet deal they have in the dating world by not making men jump through hoops, women will find a way to slut-shame her. The MRA screeds I agree with are the ones who call out MS Sammi Glick on her bullshit _and_ call out feminism for not condemning any fellow sister. Of course, that’s not the academic and social activist feminists. That’s the social media twaddle “you go girl!” of Jezebel feminism. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2015, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1151 "2015-08-12T00:56:38Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > They expect the same pay for the same work, but also expect men to make the first move and pick up the first check. And if any other women queers the sweet deal they have in the dating world by not making men jump through hoops, women will find a way to slut-shame her. Conflating two different populations of women. In my experience, the ones who want and expect same pay for same work are also willing to pick up first checks, and are generally not the ones slut-shaming others. ---
**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 12, 2015, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1152 "2015-08-12T01:05:04Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > [Bolding mine.] > > Earlier you said (1101): > The Wikipedia definition doesn’t say anything about statutory rape or prison jokes. > > Why do you blame them on patriarchy? Because it is consistent with these traditional and homophobic views and gender roles. > [@](#): > > The definition (to condense it a bit) says that patriarchy is about men having power and privilege. Assuming for the moment that men have or had power and privilege, why do they use it to send men (but not women) to war? Why was the Federal definition of rape, "the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will,” until 2012? Why is rape of a woman one of the harshest punished crimes there is? Why are men more likely to be penalized, and more harshly penalized, at every level of the criminal justice system? Why have women’s health centers been federally funded since 1970, while men’s health centers are not even a thing? > > In other words, if patriarchy is all about giving power and privileges to men, why have men used all that power to privilege women? In general women have not been priveliged. For most of history they had fewer economic and political rights than men. They were usually blamed and punished for adultery, more so than men. They had little or no rights if they were abused by husbands or other male relatives. So, mostly, women have not been priveliged. > [@](#): > > Is patriarchal culture the same as patriarchy, or something different? > > And if women have supported patriarchal culture, is it possible there was something in for them? > > To put it bluntly, (although this is certainly not part of the Wikipedia definition) is it possible a central tenet of “patriarchy” was putting women’s safety and well-being ahead of men’s? A central tenet was the value of female sexual purity, which is the main cause of slut shaming, victim blaming for rape, and other sexual double standards and injustices. Considering that wives usually had no recourse if beaten or raped by their husbabds, I don’t believe that patriarchy particularly valued women’s safety, except to keep them safe for sexual and reproductive use, and it certainly didn’t value their well being, considering the lack of rights and even education afforded to women. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2015, 1:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1153 "2015-08-12T01:14:25Z")
> [@Emiliana](#): > > Best interests of the children, check. > Automatic presumption regarding mother, check. Turning dads into second class parents, check. > > 50/50 starting presumption, fine. But this is exactly where the individual circumstances of the parents and children come into play. Will the former spouses be living in the same school system? Will their jobs both give them the flexibility to care for the children? What do the children, especially older children, want? Will both ex-spouses have living situations that allow for the adequate care and housing of the kids? Will the kids spend an inordinate amount of time moving from one household to the other? Would alternate weekends and summers with one parent be less disruptive than a literal split?Etc., etc. > > I’m quite certain that these are precisely the sorts of questions that are considered in custody disputes. A legally mandated 50/50 custody split would prevent the best interests of the children from prevailing. What constitutes their best interests depends on the individual circumstances of the family, not on some abstract ideal of equality. Children are not property to be divided equally between parents. > > You seem to be living in a world that no longer exists if it ever did. You’ve been provided with plenty of evidence of how custody actually works, and yet you won’t let go of the notion that something other than legally mandated 50/50 custody is equivalent to wrenching men out of their children’s lives. Thanks for misrepresenting what I said. Here’s what I said: > [@](#): > > 50/50 parenting just means that that’s the rebuttable presumption, or the starting point. If a judge wants to depart from that, she’s free to do so, but must articulate the reasons for doing it. If, for example, the parents agree to something else, that would be reason enough. Here’s your misrepresentation: > [@](#): > > A legally mandated 50/50 custody split would prevent the best interests of the children from prevailing. Do you understand the difference between a rebuttable presumption, and “legally mandate[ing]” something? If so, why did you misrepresent what I said? If not, why are you asserting you know more about child custody than I do? As long as we’re at it, let’s look at this quote, too: > [@](#): > > You’ve been provided with plenty of evidence of how custody actually works, Really? I’ve asked twice for evidence from people who claim to know “how custody really works”. Neither provided any. Will you? While we’re at it, thanks for this as well: > [@](#): > > Children are not property to be divided equally between parents. Can you quote me anywhere saying “children are property”? No? Of course not. Maybe in your world, strawmannirg someone else’s argument is the equivalent of making an actual argument yourself. It’s not. But let’s look at some actual real live evidence. This information is from the [US Census](http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-240.pdf), so it’s a bit dated: they only do the census every ten years. > [@](#): > > [ul] > [li]As of 2010, 11.2 million women had been awarded custody, vs. 2.4 million men. That’s about 18% fathers, vs. 82% mothers. [/li][li]Out of the 2.4 million fathers, 740,000 were awarded child support, or about 31%.[/li][li]Out of the mothers, it was 6.2 million, or 55%.[/li][li]Mothers were awarded more child support, and got a higher percentage of what they were awarded. Women were also more likely to get all the support awarded to them. [/li][li]Despite all that, fathers with custody were more likely to be employed, and less likely to live in poverty.[/li][/ul] While we’re at it, let’s look at some differences between children who have fathers actively involved in their lives, vs. those that don’t: From [Psychology Today](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201106/the-decline-fatherhood-and-the-male-identity-crisis): > [@](#): > > [ul] > [li]Fatherless children are at a dramatically greater risk of drug and alcohol abuse, mental illness, suicide, poor educational performance, teen pregnancy, and criminality, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Center for Health Statistics.[/li][li]Child abuse is significantly more likely to occur in single parent homes than in intact families;[/li][li]63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census;[/li][li]72% of adolescent murderers grew up without fathers. 60% of America’s rapists grew up the same way according to a study by D. Cornell (et al.), in Behavioral Sciences and the Law;[/li][li]71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes according to the National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools;[/li][li]80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes according to a report in Criminal Justice & Behavior;[/li][li]90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes;[/li][li]Children from low-income, two-parent families outperform students from high-income, single-parent homes. Almost twice as many high achievers come from two-parent homes as one-parent homes according to a study by the Charles F. Kettering Foundation.[/li][li]85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes according to a study by the Center for Disease Control;[/li][li]Of all violent crimes against women committed by intimates about 65% were committed by either boy-friends or ex-husbands, compared with 9 % by husbands;[/li][li]Girls living with non-natal fathers (boyfriends and stepfathers) are at higher risk for sexual abuse than girls living with natal fathers;[/li][li]Daughters of single mothers are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 111% more likely to have children as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a premarital birth and 92% more likely to dissolve their own marriages.[/li][li]A large survey conducted in the late 1980s found that about 20% of divorced fathers had not seen his children in the past year, and that fewer than 50% saw their children more than a few times a year.[/li][li]In a longitudinal study of 1,197 fourth-grade students, researchers observed “greater levels of aggression in boys from mother-only households than from boys in mother-father households,” according to a study published in the Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology.[/li][li]At play and in other realms, fathers tend to stress competition, challenge, initiative, risk taking and independence. Mothers, as caretakers, stress emotional security and personal safety. Father’s involvement seems to be linked to improved quantitative and verbal skills, improved problem-solving ability and higher academic achievement for children. Men also have a vital role to play in promoting cooperation and other “soft” virtues. Involved fathers, it turns out according to one 26 year longitudinal research study may be of special importance for the development of empathy in children.[/li][/ul] Giving children equal time with their fathers is in the best interests of children. The people who argue otherwise are appealing to ingrained sex discrimination and prejudice: not evidence. The people who benefit from the every-other-weekend model are women. Not children. And even whether women benefit is debatable. To quote from an atypical feminist, [Karen DeCrow](http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/06/the-now-president-who-became-a-mens-rights-activist/372742/): > [@](#): > > In a 1984 Father’s Day column, DeCrow described a conversation with a client, a divorced mother of three who was having childcare troubles because of an unusual work schedule: “‘What about the father?’ I asked. ‘Is he willing to take them during those hours?’ ‘Their father?’ she exclaimed. ‘That’s just what he wants!’” ---
**Author:** ![Emiliana](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f0a364/32.png) [@Emiliana](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Emiliana)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2015, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1154 "2015-08-12T01:20:59Z")
Good lord, Linus, you’re a piece of work. You yourself argued that NOW’s opposition to legally-mandated 50/50 custody was equivalent to wrenching men out of children’s lives. This indicates that you support legally-mandated 50/50 custody, which is quite different from supporting an initial presumption of same. You don’t seem to understand your own posts, much less anyone else’s. ---
**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:** [August 12, 2015, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1155 "2015-08-12T01:23:34Z")
> [@KarlGrenze](#): > > Conflating two different populations of women. In my experience, the ones who want and expect same pay for same work are also willing to pick up first checks, and are generally not the ones slut-shaming others. Well, you’ve lived a charmed life. A lot of women want every Godamn thing they can get, by any means available. I’ve been here since 2000, and on very rare occasions Radfems or trolls posing as same have started threads. They never lasted long. That’s too bad. I’d love to defend their viewpoint based on my anecdotal experience that, while some women can be evil bitches, some men will always outdo them in sheer brutality. **iiandyii** was a submariner, IIRC, not an amphib like me, so he may never have seen half a dozen troopships unload thousands of young men into a Third World port. But he and many other men here have seen that it’s not the rare aged Bundys and it’s not the individual patriarchy. People just aren’t a very nice species. ---
**Author:** ![KarlGrenze](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/dbc845/32.png) [@KarlGrenze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KarlGrenze)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2015, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1156 "2015-08-12T01:34:47Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > Well, you’ve lived a charmed life. A lot of women want every Godamn thing they can get, by any means available. I don’t deny that, I’m just stating that most of the ones I know that are most vocal about getting equal pay are not the ones who are slut shaming and don’t shrink from paying on dates. The ones I know who want every godamn thing don’t seem to care much for equal pay, though. But they’re again not most of the ones I’ve interacted with. ---
**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 12, 2015, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1157 "2015-08-12T01:37:25Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > Well, you’ve lived a charmed life. A lot of women want every Godamn thing they can get, by any means available. True. That doesn’t mean that every group of women is interchangeable. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2015, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1158 "2015-08-12T01:48:54Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > Well, you’ve lived a charmed life. A lot of women want every Godamn thing they can get, by any means available. Unlike men, 100% of whom live to the utmost altruistic expectations on all occasions. ---
**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:** [August 12, 2015, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1159 "2015-08-12T02:01:55Z")
I was not broad-brushing the entire sex; just, on one hand, the bastards among women who pull that shit. What’s the “ism” to stop them? Destroy the patriarchy so that’s one angle they can’t exploit? If for no other reason, the MRAs should get behind feminism for that effort. What the men’s movement complains about most of all is women’s entitlement and hypocrisy. It’s hard for a misanthrope like myself not to be mistaken for a misogynist. Let women and gays serve equally in the military, _so they can go to poor countries and kill the inhabitants too!_ Stop rape in the military: not only is it unjust but it destroys unit cohesion \*and hey, we can’t kill these inhabitants effectively. \* How about an economy where a white woman has the career option be in as inessential a position as freelance actress/activist _and not have to worry about housing and food_, while that same economy puts Black guys out on the street with no direction and egos so lame they catcall to assert their pathetic masculinity? “Patriarchy” is too simple an explanation for the problems of humanity. ---
**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:** [August 12, 2015, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390/1160 "2015-08-12T02:03:33Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Unlike men, 100% of whom live to the utmost altruistic expectations on all occasions. That’s a cheap shot and you know I never ever said anything of the sort. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=57) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/anti-feminism/725390.md?page=59)