Many. And I’m forbidden by the rules of the SDMB to name their names or even specifically mention where you can go to read it for yourself. If I wouldn’t be banned from this board for giving you those names and locations I would give them to you.
And what about the men who get abused, mugged, beaten, attacked, raped and murdered? What about ‘lower class’ men? You, margin, are the kind of person that is the reason I will never claim to be a feminist. Because feminism is a culture of fear and hatred of all things male.
If feminism were all about equality, the leading feminist ‘scholars’ wouldn’t be using terms like ‘testosterone poisoning’ and threatening the hell out of people like Erin Pizzey (who fights against all domestic violence) and Christina Hoff Somers whose research has proven that girls are out-classing boys every day in language and reading skills and are rapidly vanishing any gap that existed in maths and sciences.
Far more experience than I would ever care to have again. I attended meetings of the Campus Women’s Organization at my university for 3 years. I read feminist works because I had professors who were feminists and used their classes as avenues to shove down our throats their own political ideologies about how nasty and awful men are, and that men are oppressors.
As for Catharine MacKinnon, Andrea Dworkin and Robin Morgan not being a ‘majority’, you’re right, they’re not. It’s not possible for a majority of any group to be the leaders of it, but they certainly are extremely well known, widely studied, and regarded as ‘leading feminist scholars’.
Funny, then, that a philosophy entirely based upon the female part of the population being the oppressed victims of the ‘patriarchy’ made you feel like you were not a victim, isn’t it?
What the fuck makes you think they owe it to you to ‘do a damned thing’ for you?
They don’t. Nobody owes you a goddamn thing because of your vagina. Nobody is obligated to do a ‘damned thing’ for you or any ‘woman like you’. Get used to it. It’s the way the world works. You aren’t owed anything. You have to earn it. Women like you contribute to the attitude that feminists are whiny bitches who want everything handed to them. And you know what I found? Men ‘like Andy’ don’t bitch about women who are willing to earn their own way in life.
Here are some cites, as demanded, on feminist utopian fiction.
Feminist utopian fiction is a sub-genre that ranges from serious polemic to wishful fantasy. In depicting societies of the future or other worlds, feminist utopian fiction often involves science-fiction elements, though other stories are placed in the distant past, in the not-too-distant future, or fictional contemporary societies. Because of its wide range of setting and themes, feminist utopian fiction crosses over several genres – novels with literary aspirations, science fiction, historical romance, and more.
Some of the frequent themes of feminist utopian fiction are societies in which men have either died out, have never existed, or live separately from woman, who are the narrative focus. The all-female societies in some cases propagate through cloning, parthenogenesis or other means. In Ursula K. LeGuin’s “The Left Hand of Darkness,” characters are sexually neutral and can change freely into males or females and back again. In other stories, men and women co-exist equally or women rule. In historical fiction, the utopian society might worship the Goddess – at least until patriarchal religion ruins everything.
A related sub-genre is the feminist dystopia, which often imagines a horrible future society displaying the oppression of a ruthless patriarchal rule, the most famous example of this being “The Handmaid’s Tale.”
There is also a male-centered version in which men encounter a society of women and re-assert themselves. This theme has been made into a number of humorously bad movies such as “Queen of Outer Space” and “Cat Women of the Moon,” and some critics suggest that the animus lies in men returning from World War II and finding that women had taken over many traditionally male jobs and roles.
But it is feminist utopian fiction that has been the more prolific sub-genre and as such it has received a good deal of scholarly and historical interest.
Defenders of feminist utopian fiction might call it empowering or minimize the hostility in it as mere wishful fantasy: men disappear and women get to run things. Yet we can’t deny the animosity in those works whose theme is how much the world would improve if men did not exist, or those that portray all men as too violent to live in a civil society. “Empowerment” here descends into female chauvinism.
The web has many sites that discuss feminist utopian fiction – many that can be found by searching for that term.
On the site Feminist Fantasy, Science Fiction and Utopia, (http://www.feministsf.org/femsf/index.html) for example, you can find bibliographies, research, criticism, checklists of authors, and a page dedicated to “Theme & Character Lists: Women-Only Worlds,” which includes some fiction that uses a women-only theme in a non-feminist manner.
Note the prevalence of the theme of reproduction without men:
Feminist utopian fiction has been the subject of research and has been taught in courses at the college level. Here is one teacher’s recommended list:
Special note to Margin. Feminist utopian fiction crosses over several genres: science fiction, fantasy, cyberpunk feminism, satire, feminist propaganda, historical romance, and so on. And it is done in tones ranging from serious to farcical. As such, it spans a wide cross-section of readers, from comic-book level to college. In fact, it is taught in some courses. It is not a secret, nor is it something I made up.
You could find this out if you would just get off your lazy ass and do a google search. You might discover that things exist even if you are ignorant of them. While your ignorance is broad, at least it is very deep. So I will be damned if I’m going to spend hours finding, coding and writing up links simply because you have your head so far up your ass you think your farts sound like the ocean. Everything I have written on this thread could be similarly backed up, though posting it for you is a classic case of pearls before swine. I will be glad to further demonstrate your ignorance on any individual topic you wish to be proved wrong about. But listen to this: doing nothing but screaming “cite,” and continuing to scream it after sources are provided is the epitome of trollish behavior. If you continue, we can take it up with the moderators.
Then you will note that those posts do not begin with “All feminists …”
As the people I have quoted are all feminists, you are beating another strawwomyn.
That is an outright lie.
Another outright lie. You have yourself pasted and reprinted that bulletted list, and it contains nothing like that. You have made this lie several times.
See below.
This is my first warning before I report you as a troll. I have repeatedly asked you which items you would like a cite for. I am not about to let you scream “cite” in blanket fashion. I will not provide you with a cite, for example, for the existence of affirmative action. Its existence is common knowledge. Demanding a cite for common knowledge, making posts of nothing more than “cite?” for an entire post, ignoring offered citations and continuing to scream “cite,” and refusing to specify what parts you wish citations for are all trollish behavior. So are outright lies purporting to be quotes of what another poster has said. You are guilty of all of these in just this thread, and you will cease such behavior or we will take it to the moderators to see if you have committed any bannable offenses.
Also, I would like you to respond to the specific quote I have posted from Robin Morgan: “I feel that “man-hating” is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.”
I ask you again: Do you condemn this statement?
If you have nothing to say against it, we can assume you do not disagree with Morgan.
The extremists are real feminists.
Or perhaps you declaring that those who don’t think like you are not feminists. In which case you are behaving like the aforementioned “feminazis.”
And if you actually don’t agree with Morgan, why don’t you directly condemn her words? You have certainly spent enough time and energy defending her.
Child abuse and neglect also exist in just about every culture. I’m guessing you would take offense if a political movement began portraying them as:
A) A crime only women committed, and
B) A crime that all women are guilty of in some form or another, and
C) Wildly more prevelant than any other research shows them to be.
– because that is exactly the way feminists manipulate emotional reactions with exaggerated scare-stories about rape and domestic violence. Child abuse is a real problem, just like rape. But if someone used child abuse as a political hammer to bash your entire group, I imagine you’d object. Why is it that you can’t understand, then, that men also object to being demonized?
I am an educated man. I also am the son of a single mother who held a blue-collar job, and I joined the Army and worked blue-collar jobs so that I could get that education. In other words, I didn’t have the easy life bestowed on me for being male. However, when I enterred my chosen field, I did find many feminists trying to block my way via affirmative action.
I think I now understand how you define “hostility.” I said I didn’t believe your account, that I suspected it was incomplete. You apparently are the type to say you are a victim of “hostility” if people don’t instantly believe you.
But your account is only one side of the story, and there are plenty of red flags that cast doubt on it. For instance, how in the heck do you file suit with the ERA? The law didn’t even pass.
Consider: We have seen you embrace anti-male feminists; we have seen you attack people for disagreeing with you; we have seen you create fanciful slurs and character assassination against those who disagree with you; and we have seen an outpouring of ill-informed and poorly constructed vitriol from you. Why should we think you are telling the complete truth about this alleged firing? There is ample room to doubt you, and you have supplied the room yourself.
Judging from your character as displayed here, I suspect the fault is not in the stars, Maratio, but in yourself.
It is unfortunate that you have allowed this alleged incident to drive you into the same anti-male camp as Robin Morgan and Susan Brownmiller. But once you have crossed the line into abject hatred, Malvolio, you lose the audience’s sympathy. And there is nothing in your life that makes it right for you to hate men because they are men.
(And on a previous episode of “Margin:”)
We’ll leave it to the readers to interpret who is displaying rage here.
Actually, Marge N., you owe me and everyone else the right to be free of job discrimination. And since you’re not likely to proffer it willingly, we will have to insist. You also owe it to me to see me as a human being rather than as the rapist-oppressor stereotype that feminists have used against all men – stereotypes that you yourself defend.
I’d like to close with Robin Morgan’s quote on man-hating and ask you once again to condemn it. Please note that we men did not dream up this anti-male hatred displayed by such feminists. “I feel that “man-hating” is an honorable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” Robin Morgan
Cite please?
I would hazard a guess that it has to do with feminists attempting to demonize men on the issue. Whenever I read about a feminist-sponsored march or other event against domestic violence, I have noted that they mention only female victims, and only females who are victims of men.** Prove me wrong and show me a feminist organization that lists male victims like Phil Hartman in its listings of domestic violence victims.**
(originally posted by Biggirl)
Actually, they don’t. None of those organizations support reproductive rights for fathers, do they? Nor do they educate people about domestic violence. Rather, they use domestic violence for propaganda purposes. Not so? You can refute that simply by showing that any of those organizations educate the public about domestic violence committed by women. This is a broad area, so you can show us if they educate the public about the following topics:
[ul]
[li]violence committed by women against men[/li][li]violence committed by women against women[/li][li]violence committed by women against children.[/li][/ul]
My bet – and feel free to prove me wrong – is that these groups discuss only violence by men against women. Hence they are not truly educating the public about domestic violence: they are politicizing a distorted picture of the issue. This distortion comes down to the basic message that women are innocent and men are evil. You can prove me wrong on this by showing me where those groups educated the public on violent acts committed by women.
As for providing good, affordable medical care, please prove me wrong by showing me where any of those groups lobby for equal medical care for men. Or are they demanding more of our resources go to women’s health issues even though women live longer than men?
Quite true. I remember reading about Pizzey. In her research, she found that a number of women who claimed to be victims of domestic violence were themselves violent people. And because she broke this little secret she has been threatened with violence by other feminists – y’know, the ones who are so opposed to violence and all. Perhaps someone can provide a cite to that, as I am quoting from memory.
I believe that feminists mounted a campaign to suppress her workds and keep it off library shelves. It apparently has been quite successful. However, you can read it online.
Precisely, especially because my own mother was a single, working mother.
What I do object to are feminists who feel they have a grievance against the entire male populace, or that men somehow “owe” women because of our original sin of being born male. Also, I more than object to feminists who get their feelings hurt in some situation and decide they are entitled to restitution from and revenge against all men. I react to being hated pretty much as any other person would.
margin, you said that feminists make abortion rights a key plank of their policy because abortion is a necessary part of a woman’s ability to control her fertility, which is itself necessary in order for women to gain their other rights. Therefore the right to abortion is asserted simply by virtue of the reason why you want it, and any other rights and wrongs are mere side issues (though you assure me, comfortingly, that they would not be taken lightly). Therefore “If I don’t want it here and now, I want the right to kill it” is an accurate statement of the position, although it is not a direct quote (and I didn’t claim it was one). I only remark that it doesn’t sound so pretty to phrase it that way, and wouldn’t make much of a marching song.
As to SAL, I don’t know him from a hole in the ground and I don’t, off-hand, remember any time I’ve addressed him directly, though I may have.
But I’ll do so now: When margin claimed that most violence is male-on-male, she was right. Just not domestic violence, and I don’t think she claimed it was. Most violence is extra-mural, between men aged 20 ±5 years - and, of course, women are comparatively seldom the victims of violence outside the home, though anyone would be forgiven for thinking otherwise.
I seem to remember that Pizzey found that more than 60% of the women turning up in her refuge were as violent as the men they were leaving. Taken with the violent women who weren’t going to be turning up, because of not having a violent male partner to run away from… And yes, I’ve heard the death-threat stories too, although here in Websense Hell I ain’t going to be able to search for them, I shouldn’t think.
Oh, and margin - Sarcasm is my friend? :rolleyes:
You ask (paraphrased): “If domestic violence against men is such an issue, why aren’t men doing more about it?”. Well, that is the question. Possibly because there isn’t a men’s movement comparable to feminism that aims at supporting men qua men, advancing the rights of men, raising the profile of downtrodden men, or even (dare I say it) exaggerating the extent of the downtreading. Possibly because of the very successful representation of domestic violence as an evil solely perpetrated by men upon women - certainly whenever I see anything in the media about it, the “picture posed by models” invariably features a filthy-tempered brute of a man lashing out at a cringing, inoffensive woman. shrug It’s a complex question. What’s your explanation?
I was not characterizing men who are opposed to the worst aspects of feminism in any way at all. I was making fun of SAL specifically.
Also, I take exception to the way he and good ole Rush take the extreme fringe of the feminist movement and use it to describe all feminists. Something that Rush is apparently lying his way away from as I noted earlier. (Note his characterization of NOW as a bunch of Feminazis and his new definition of a Feminazi as just 12 or so extremists). A tact his dittoheads do not seem to be following (note Shodan’s explanation of a Feminazi as a feminist who think reproduction rights are one of, if not the most, important issue facing feminists today.
This is the reason why most women who believe in reproduction rights and equal rights do not self-identify as feminist-- not because the extremist feminists have taken over the movement (see the links I’ve provided to actual feminist organizations) but because the right has redefined feminism to mean: Those crazy bitches who hate men and want to kill them all.
It sounds like you are trying to have it both ways.
First you condemn Rush for characterizing all feminists based on what the fringe elements say. Then you argue that the position that abortion is the most important issue around is a mainstream feminist position.
The definition of Femi-nazi as “a feminist who thinks abortion is the most important issue” is not mine, it is Rush’s. Your cites seem to show that he was entirely correct in characterizing it as the position of NOW and the other organizations you cite.
Heck, read your own quote and see what you mention first as the determinants of feminism:
And I believe you are probably incorrect about why women are reluctant nowadays to identify as feminist.
There * an* element of “crazy bitches who hate men and want to kill them” in the modern feminist movement, and they have a disproportionate voice in many feminist organizations and feminist rhetoric. And the failure of mainstream feminists to renounce that element alienates many women who do not see any reason to proactively hate or preemptively judge the men in their lives as evil oppressors. When you add to that the increasing tendency to make support for abortion the be-all and end-all of political discussion (as pointed out by Rush Limbaugh), you begin alienating the substantial numbers of women who are not so reflexively pro-abortion.
Then, as the US moves further to the right (as witnessed by the elections of the post-Clinton era), and NOW and other feminist organizations move further to the left, you alienate still more women. And the persistent man-bashing and dishonest use of statistics and issues mentioned by SAL alienates even men of good will, who have no desire to keep women down, but also no desire to be kept down themselves. Even the most sensitive, caring, feminist male on earth gets tired of being blamed every time some East Coast extremist doesn’t get what she wants.
Which accounts for the common formulation “I am in favor of equal rights, but I am not a feminist” we have heard from catsix and others. People have come to understand that “feminism” doesn’t mean what it used to - and this is not because of characterization by the Right. It is based on what comes out of Ms. Magazine and NOW - those who have set themselves up as the Voice of Modern Feminism.
Feminism used to be support for equal rights for women. Now it means support for almost every crackpot notion the limousine liberals in NYC and LA can come up with. And the stridency with which any hint of disagreement is attacked leads Rush to label them as “feminazis”.
The label wouldn’t stick if it didn’t have a certain resonance.
If you want to say Rush is lying because he said there were only a dozen feminazis, and you are arguing “No, we all are”, fine. But I don’t think it helps your argument.
Please provide a cite for Robin Morgan’s being threatened. And Chirstina Hoff-Summers----sweetie, you just lost whatever credibility you had with regard to feminists. She’s widely regarded as anti-feminist who doesn’t let facts get in the way of feminist-bashing. What next? Kate Roiphe? CAmille Paglia? Phyllis Schlafly? Elaine Donnelly?
Uh, yeah. Got a cite for the hatred and fear? Because thus far all I’ve seen in this thread is paranoid ranting. If I ever thought that feminism was unnecessary, this thread indictes otherwise.
Uh, yeah, and I'm supposed to care because...why?
Me: His (Andy’s) personal experiences lead him to make accusations that feminists—he didn’t qualify that to 'only the extreme ones when he did that bullet list-----want to kill off the male half of the speices.
Bolding mine. And here’s the actual quote. “Do you think feminism advocates civil rights? Well, there are so many areas in which feminism opposes the rights of men that I doubt I could list them all, but for starters:”
**Gee, I don’t see a qualifier before ‘feminism’ so it becomes a general statement of feminist purpose. ** Try again, sweetie.
Any bigoted label that reduces people to charactitures is going to have resonance with people who want to perpetuate stereotypes. Frankly, I get to refer back to this thread from now on any time somebody tries to tell me there’s no need for feminism.
I
God, Andy, sometimes you’re just laugh-out-loud funny. You think I hate you because you’re a man?
Who said you were a man? If you were a man, you’d be honest. Not this dancing around shit, which is what you’ve done since this topic opened.
Give me a cite for where I quoted you above, or go away.
Uh, Shodan, I’ve been asking Andy for a cite for two pages. Until he provides me with what I’ve asked, demanding one of me while ignoring his refusal indicates a certain…let’s see. One standard for Andy, another for me? Hm, what could that be?
Also, I meant Erin Pizzey instead of Robin Morgan. Obviously there’s some deep dark significance to that, though.
If Andy claims he’s hated because he’s a man, he needs to start standing up and acting like one. I’ve met lots of boys who whine and bitch, but the men I’ve met have been notable for their honesty and other adult charactaristics. All Andy’s done has been rant and bitch and make accusations. Funnily enough, though, his defenders aren’t bothered by that at all.
Right after you provide me a cite in which I said Robin Morgan was threatened.
Then please show us a credible refutation of Hoff-Sommers’s research. I know what she’s ‘regarded as’ by the feminists like Andrea Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon. What I have yet to see is them disprove any of her research. Hating Hoff-Sommers because she doesn’t toe the Dworkinite feminist line does not make Hoff-Sommers incorect.
You mean the stuff about how men like Andy are out to get you and how men like him cost you your job?
Having talked to feminists who are afraid to go outdoors after dark because there are men out there who might rape and kill them, who will actually shout ‘No!’ at any man who makes eye contact with them on a sidewalk, or like Catharine MacKinnon handing them some kind of business card with a ‘You don’t have the right to look at me.’ message on it?
And what about the statement that “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” from Brownmiller?
How about Germain Greer: “I have a great deal of difficulty with the idea of the ideal man. As far as I’m concerned, men are the product of a damanged gene.”?
Of course, you will blindly ignore this as you have every other cite of prominent feiminist leaders of the feminist movement saying things that are full of hatred and fear of men. You are nothing if not consistent.
So are you telling us that it’s because you’re a woman that you dance around the cites, covering your ears and howling ‘I haven’t seen any proof?’
There’s a difference between being male and being a man.
I’ll provide a cite when Andy does, sweetie. Nice of you to hold two different people to two different standards, though. And I have to say, it’s just incredibly amusing to watch you get all literal-minded over the Robin Morgan thing.
Heh. Those jackbooted feminists strike again! And oh my goodness, here we have unnamed feminists who are afraid to go out of doors! Why, someone who uses Christina Hoff-Summers and defends Andy just must be fair! Especially when they say stuff like this:
Gee, I’m sure incredibly sexist guys just love working with feminists who call them on their bullshit. I’m just sure of it. Along with their little female cheerleaders.
Food is very important to me. I need it, every day. If I don’t have it, I will die. It is absolutely vital to my life. Crucial.
BUT, if you can imagine, it is notthe most important issue to me. It is important, yes, but it would be a gross mischaracterization of that opinion to say that it is the most important issue to me.
Abortion is kind of the same thing. If you say "Abortion is the most important issue for feminists/feminazis (whatever) it is a similar mischaracterization: it is important, yes, but not something that most feminists obsess over night and day, not something that defines their life or their political views. It is very, very important to feminists like me. No question. I am vehemently, passionately pro-choice. I can’t imagine anyone more pro-choce than me (although many are no doubt equal).
But how often does this come up in my life?
Answer: Pretty much exclusively on the Straight Dope. If you knew me IRL you would probably have no idea about the extent of my pro-choice views. I have never been to a demonstration on the subject. I have never participated in debates (again, excluding the SDMB). I have never lobbied the government. I have never joined any groups. If you asked any one of my friends/relations/enemies/adversaries/colleagues - any one at all - what the most important thing in my life was, not a single one would say “Abortion rights.” Zero. And I know a whole lot of feminists, and you couldn’t say that abortion is the most important thing to any of them. So please stop saying that !
Furthermore:
All this crap about using
to condemn “feminism” is bad rhetoric. You could make any argument about any topic in this manner. (Americans are bigots. Just look at the KKK ! They’re fundies too - check this quote from Pat Robertson! And violent - oh my, look at the murder rate ! --> this strategy is laughable in other contexts. And yet acceptible here. Hm.)
No one has to prove that Germaine Greer is wrong. No one has to prove that she’s an idiot. No one needs to provide any cites to counter that BS. What you need to do, if you want to describe “feminism” or “feminists,” is prove that there is unity among them and that they all share the opinion that you do.
Imagine this, if you can: an ordinary woman who describes herself as feminist, and who disagrees with Germaine Greer when she says men are caused by a damaged gene.
What does that mean? Well, it means that “feminists” don’t think that men were caused by a damaged gene, for starters, (“some feminists” does not equal “feminists” - you have to be quite clear about these things) and to suggest that just because I identify myself with the same label as her means I endorse everything she says, is shoddy reasoning. Very shoddy.
Do you agree with everyone either completely or not at all? Are there no shades of grey in your world?
“There are as many violent women as men, but there’s a lot of money in hating men, particularly in the United States – millions of dollars. It isn’t a politically good idea to threaten the huge budgets for women’s refuges by saying that some of the women who go into them aren’t total victims.”
– Erin Pizzey
All I gotta say about this thread is I REALLY, REALLY want to go screw the daylights outta my hubby! Yeah, bring on that nasty, violent penetrative sex!
My wife watches football more than I do. That’s a great way to turn the tables on men, by the way. If your wife starts telling you about the injuries on the team your favorite team is going to play next week, the power balance has shifted in a very subtle but important way.
If, OTOH, you switch to Trading Spaces in the middle of the playoffs. Well, watch your back. Trixie is movin in.
Yes, it’s all about football.
Here, crush up this oxycontin. That should clear things up.
First off, I’m not your ‘sweetie’. Second, Andy has already provided actual quotes from leaders in the feminist movement and prominent feminist authors to back up his opinion of feminism. Third, you’re the one who fucked up, and you didn’t admit to it until it was pointed out to you that you had put words in my mouth. I responded to what you said because, get this, I’m not a fucking mind reader.
I’d recommend that you go talk to them yourself if it weren’t a matter of inter-message-board-war starting. Course, you’re a big girl, go do a websearch for feminist message boards and I’m sure you’ll find lots of ‘feminists’ discussing how afraid they are to go outside alone.
Andy seems like the kind of person who treats people the same whether they have a dick or not, which is of course totally contrary to your ‘I’ve got a vagina, so you big bad men owe me something’ chip upon your shoulder.
I really doubt Andy would have a problem with it if called on bullshit he actually committed rather than just having you rant and wail at him because he’s male and therefore automatically a guilty son of a bitch who owes you something.
“As a sex, we are vastly superior to men, but it is taboo to show it.” -Kate Saudners, Feminist Author, The Sunday Times, July 16, 1995.
Kramarae and Treichler, A Feminist Dictionary 1985
Catharine MacKinnon, Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, pg 129
How many prominent feminists who lead the feminist movement have to be quoted? These are the people that the Campus Women’s Organization, that NOW, that Ms. Magazine readers and editors and writers follow, whose words they quote, whose books they read, and whose ideals they hold.
And it’s a long tired argument to say ‘you can’t criticize feminism because not all of them are like that.’ Not all KKK members burn crosses, either, but that doesn’t lend any credibility to the KKK movement as a whole.
Feminism is screwed, and its self professed leaders got it there.
If you could come up with one, that would be a good beginning.
I mean, MacKinnon? Please. Her name always gets trotted out in debates like this, but I have yet to meet any feminist of any stripe who actually thinks very well of her. She certainly doesn’t “lead the feminist movement”. MacKinnon owes her high profile to the fact that she tends to say weird and controversial things, and anti-feminists love to quote her (often out of context) because of it.
I’m sure she must have her fans, but I have never met one. The closest I’ve heard to support for her among feminists is “yeah, she’s pretty wacky, but not really as bad as the right-wingers would have you believe” or “some of her ideas are interesting, but she really goes too far”. If the opposing side didn’t give her so much attention, I think MacKinnon and her work would be almost completely unknown. Several of the other names mentioned are women I haven’t even heard of, so I suspect they’re also far more important to anti-feminists than feminists. Many of the women quoted here certainly are not
Macalandra, so? She says that ‘there are as many violent women in the US as there are men,’ but who cares? She doesn’t live or work here. I’ll check out the link later, though. I have to go count up all the names Andy is using that being with “M”. Poor dear, he’s obviously hoping to keep track of the voices in his head by giving them names. If he doesn’t use my name, he’s shit out of luck.
catsix, sweetie, until Andy provides a cite for his shit, and until you get a clue about the fact that he’s not providing a cite, why, yes, indeed, you are a sweetie.
