Okay. 100% of the self-proclaimed feminists in this thread don’t hold all of those loony beliefs that LinusK attributes to feminism.
There is such an incredible disconnect here that I’m honestly baffled. How is what iiandyiiii said a “personal remark”?
Evidence for what? I didn’t make all those claims that suit an ideology but can’t be backed up with evidence. I linked to a shedload of evidence for various things I’ve said.
I’ll even hold this thread up as evidence. Evidence of an irrational ideology that uses crude but functional psychology to enforce a norm. We Godwinned ages ago, but there’s a sound reason the term Feminazi became popular. And now you get to deploy 'he said ‘feminazi’ and the faithful will froth. I spent 20 years believing the same swill you swallow. It’s in my sincerest best wish for you that you wake up.
(And yes, there may well be much wrong, and much that needs sorting out - the young and passionate often attach themselves to any movement that seems to be ‘the answer’. And then there’s the realisation, as with communism for example, that people are the problem and always will be. Women are people, by the way - radical notion, apparently, even to some feminists. Equally appalling people, because that’s the nature of people, whether they have innies or outies).
Maybe you should slow down? I’ll run through it again: it’s not a “loony fringe” of feminism that drives anti-feminism. Anti-feminism pre-dates all the stuff you’re complaining about; it’s driven by opposition to gender equality, like it always has been.
I reached that conclusion by interacting with hundreds, maybe thousands, of avowed feminists, and finding zero hateful misandrists in that cohort.
The word “feminist”, in the sense of “women’s rights movement”, dates back to the late 19th century. There’s nothing retroactive about it.
Misogyny exists, sure. Far more prevalent is sexism.
Yeah, maybe slow down and read the posts you’re responding to.
(I’m neuro-typical, for whatever that matters).
Yes. This is reflected in the board rules, as well.
I’ll get right on that.
Well, I was just trying to clarify who these people were that weren’t the loony fringe extremists, that were (according to multiple unsubstantiated claims) ‘most’ feminists. Because the only feminists I notice are out there pulling fire alarms to stifle disgreement, or marching with catchy slogans about toxic masculinity. They’re the ones claiming to achieve things, claiming to have an effect (leaving the rest as ineffectual). They’re the ones out and about changing things (leaving the rest at home). They’re the loud ones (leaving the rest as the quiet ones).
So, yeah, nice try painting me as a patriarchal retrograde misognist (so much easier than advancing a rational argument…) But what you’ve actually done is confirm something for me - the proper way to be a feminist is to be the loony fringe extremists.
Oh, and it’s worth noting again, Karl and Larry. We’re talking about feminists, not women. Granted, some feminists (women feminists, necessarily) claim their movement of gender equality can’t allow men to be feminists. I don’t know where you stand on the matter, but I don’t give any amount of ***** what genitalia anyone has, I am concerned with their ideas. I don’t like yours. Feel free to hate me for that, but do try to spare some time to question what that might indicate.
I don’t think you can post in response to someone you don’t notice, and you’ve been responding to plenty of feminists.
Maybe I…another personal attack, really? Pfft. Anyway, while you’re repeating your unsubstantiatable claim, I’ll repeat mine: I’m an egalitarian. I want gender equality along with racial equality and all the other equalities. The beauty of being an egalitarian is that we now know I’m not a racist either, or a homophobe etc. The difficulty with feminists is that one can so easily be a racist feminist, etc,
Well I have been in the habit of saying I’ve met more than my fair share of misandrist feminists, presumably you got my share of the others. Assuming your internet claim has any value. [Hint: It doesn’t].
And yet the suffragists were suffragists. Who, we’ll recall, didn’t give a **** for lower class women.
Yes, very prevalent among feminists, I’ve found (remember, my internet claim is as valid as your internet claim…)
Maybe write something that means something. Or stick with the personal attacks, I don’t mind.
For an egalitarian, that matters. Your able-ist privilege…nah, I can’t keep a straight face playing that game, though is truth in it. Of course it matters, but you can only apparently deal with one imbalance at a time.
Again, if you can’t be bothered to say something, rather than say nothing in response to whatever it was I said, then I can’t be bothered to track back and fndout what you’re on about. ‘Slow down’, indeed. Try shaping your communication to the medium, rather then demanding others succumb not only to your flawed and indefensible ideology, but also to your preferred communication style. Talk about privilege…
Still not making [del]any sense[/del] any posts that make any sense. An unsubstantiable internet claim is just that - a claim to be a feminist, a claim not to be a ‘loony fringe extremist’. We’ve pretty much all agreed that they exist - and even if I were to accept these unsubstantiated internet claims, we’ve got, what, a dozen? Two dozen? Not really outnumbering the evidenced ‘loony fringe extremists’ yet, not even the ones I’ve personally met (the ones who claim that since men have been the oppressors for 4,000 years, then feminism should have a 4,000 year reich, for example - we Godwinned already, but even Hitler wasn’t that ambitious).
And once again he trots out this general statement, without any evidence, caveats, limitations, or anything that identifies what he’s talking about (which isn’t much).
In case anyone forgets precisely what’s going on here, I’ll repost some of the things we do recall about the suffragist conversations in this thread:
My favorite point, of course, is where he admits that he didn’t even know the US had suffragettes. Which is pretty shocking given the breadth and depth of his conversation and knowledge to that point.
Did you know there were US feminists? Maybe that’s what’s confusing you.
I just love this new notion that maybe the people in this thread who claim to be feminists aren’t really feminists. We’re all no doubt a gang of non-feminists who ride around the internet on bicycles (like fish! ha!) and fake being feminists in order to… okay, this is the confusing part. But I’m sure it’s devious.
No, you’ve linked to a bunch of cherry-picked anecdotes. Are there some feminist who support ludicrous or discriminatory ideas? Yes, and no one has denied that. But you’ve provided zero evidence that those sorts represent the majority of feminists.
Just wanted to make sure this didn’t get lost amidst all the discussion about the Titanic.
Pay attention. I’ve made no such claim. On the other hand, I did just collect several claims that they represented the fringe of loony extremists. But nobody who has made that claim has offered any evidence.
D-. Must try harder.
You seem really angry, Jack. Would it help if a couple of us gals simpered in your general direction?
The intent is to misrepresent attacks on posts as if they were attacks on the person so that his own attacks on persons can be misrepresented as attacks on posts. It is his schtick.
Well, that’s… something.
Fairly certain you just personally attacked him. Shame on you.
Says the poster who has spent far more effort discussing posters than the topic.
You haven’t? Huh. Could have sworn you were saying just that, in pretty much every post you’ve made to this thread.
Can you remind me why you don’t identify as a feminist again?
And it’s rather amusing given that it took about five minutes AND revealed that he was talking about a different country than everyone else. How is that not time well spent?