# On Feminism **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 6, 2015, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801 "2015-11-06T14:04:37Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 9:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/81 "2015-11-09T09:47:28Z")
> [@octopus](#): > > When you stop counting 10s of millions of unemployed as unemployed the rate magically drops. We have not changed the way we count unemployment, despite the efforts of some to muddy the difference between the U3 and U6 numbers. No “magic” involved at all. ---
**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:** [November 9, 2015, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/82 "2015-11-09T10:55:40Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > :dubious: It’s a bit difficult to be sure what previous post of mine your rather minimalist quoted excerpt is referring to, but I think you were talking about this exchange with **LinusK** : Sweety, I don’t know if you read, but perhaps you watch television? Think of it as a ‘cold open’, say, where the intent is to pique the reader’s interest. If you really can’t remember what you’ve only recently posted in a thread (or if, perhaps, you respond with a kneejerk ‘No’ to any opposing opinion), there’s a little arrow in the quote box which will point you to the post being quoted (and plenty of clues in the remainder of that same post quoted directly beneath the ‘No’). There, ignorance fought. _So_ proud to part of this site. I notice, by the way, that you really haven’t responded to much else from that post. It’s a tiresome tactic, to glance across someone’s contribution and ignore the bits you don’t have an answer for and only respond to the bits you do think you have something to say about. I don’t doubt that ‘debate’ is often treated as a combative game, in which the aim is to win by any means. For myself, I prefer to think of it as a way in which ‘opposing’ ideas can be explored in order to reach common ground - much as those truly interested in equality would be looking for ways to reach true equality, rather than just fanatically grasping anything they can for their side and refusing to let go of anything they already have. I should have stated more clearly that yes, I agree that men who are falsely accused of rape (like any innocent person falsely accused of any crime, for that matter) have a lot of pain. And no, I disagree that it should be considered acceptable not to spare somebody the pain of a false accusation merely because it might provide a beneficial learning experience for them in some other respects. So, I’ll just choose one element of that bulk of the post that you ignored, and press you for a reasoned response: What would constitute ‘equality’ now? How do we reach it, and how do we reach agreement on it? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/83 "2015-11-09T11:03:01Z")
“Sweety”? ---
**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:** [November 9, 2015, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/84 "2015-11-09T11:12:18Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > See post #52. Is that based on a perverted definition of “equality”? Hmm. Let’s see what I said (and which you quoted): > [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > […]on the available evidence the most active, vocal feminists here […] hang around in the Pit […] insulting LK and myself for the thought-crime of questioning their perverted definition of ‘equality’. I’ve trimmed that down so you might see more clearly what was being said. Is the author of post #52 one of those people? I don’t think so. This is almost as poor an argument as when I said ‘imagine a detestable, despicable gender bigot’ and various posters replied ‘are you calling me detestable and despicable’ etc. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Oh, it’s real enough.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap_in_the_United_States) > > Or, perhaps you meant that [this way](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap). No, I meant in the way it’s most often encountered - something along the lines of ‘women earn 70 cents on the dollar compared to men. Women should be paid the same as men for the same work’. But they are. It’s the law (and if it weren’t, there’d be a lot more unemployed men - shareholders would demand it). As for the ‘gender pay gap’ you’re pushing, please link me to your campaign encouraging women to stop having babies and start choosing dirty, dangerous jobs that pay better than the jobs they’re currently choosing. Expressing a ‘gender pay gap’ as a feminist argument (with the implicit demand that men do something about it) does not empower women. Who spends the money men earn, by the way? Who makes the purchasing decisions in mixed-gender households? Do you factor that in at all? Men earn money and give it to women to spend (or women take it from, in divorce courts - most ‘deadbeat’ ex-partners, by the way, those who fail to pay maintenance to ex-partners and caregivers, are women). And what’s your solution to the problem of men and women being different, and economics naturally favouring work, production, value and so on (because economics isn’t a patriarchal sexist invention, you understand that, right?) Are women to be paid for their mere existence? Are all men now responsible for all women’s economic well-being (but not vice versa, that’s not the kind of equality we want, eh?) Find me a woman who wants a line-manager for her role as woman. How many would accept performance related pay? Will all women be saved from poverty? How about all men? Attacking poverty, and structures that have nothing to do with gender but everything to do with keeping the power of money in the hands of those who already have it (plenty of whom are women, ostensibly feminist women, who don’t a flying \*\*\*\* for poor women). Here’s a thing - maybe, instead of just trying to throw your faeces at those who don’t share your cultish ideology, you could actually dig into the ideas and explore ways of reaching equality for everyone. ---
**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:** [November 9, 2015, 11:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/85 "2015-11-09T11:14:46Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > “Sweety”? Yes. Not a Doctor Who fan? ETA: 1) I seem to have left unattributed elements of kimstu’s post in mine - it should be fairly easy to work out which paragraph it was. and 2) Ironic, don’t you think, that the bulk of the post you snipped a contentious bit from was about the cheap and nasty practise of just snipping contentious bits from a post while ignoring the bits you’d rather not have to address. Thanks for the prompt demonstration. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/86 "2015-11-09T12:12:29Z")
I read the whole post. I just thought your opening “Sweety” was the encapsulation of the overwhelming condescension that permeated the entire post and so I went with that. There’s a comment on the giving of enough rope and the consequences thereof you may want to consider. A fictional television character can pull off “Sweety” in the appropriate context. You didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/87 "2015-11-09T13:04:54Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > I read the whole post. I just thought your opening “Sweety” was the encapsulation of the overwhelming condescension that permeated the entire post and so I went with that. There’s a comment on the giving of enough rope and the consequences thereof you may want to consider. > > A fictional television character can pull off “Sweety” in the appropriate context. You didn’t. Oh leave him his precious fantasies… He has so little else. ---
**Author:** ![lance\_strongarm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/87869e/32.png) [@lance\_strongarm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lance_strongarm)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/88 "2015-11-09T16:34:15Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > One of the pillars of feminism is that women are oppressed. Without it, you have to ask, what is feminism for? Wrong. The pillar is that women (or men) shouldn’t be oppressed. If and when you encounter a woman (or man) who is oppressed, then you should stop it. If you don’t encounter any, you don’t worry about it. There, that puts to rest your failed argument. ---
**Author:** ![A\_isha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@A\_isha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_isha)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/89 "2015-11-09T16:46:46Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > Sweety, I don’t know if you read, but perhaps you watch television? Think of it as a ‘cold open’, say, where the intent is to pique the reader’s interest. If you really can’t remember what you’ve only recently posted in a thread (or if, perhaps, you respond with a kneejerk ‘No’ to any opposing opinion), there’s a little arrow in the quote box which will point you to the post being quoted (and plenty of clues in the remainder of that same post quoted directly beneath the ‘No’). There, ignorance fought. _So_ proud to part of this site. > > I notice, by the way, that you really haven’t responded to much else from that post. It’s a tiresome tactic, to glance across someone’s contribution and ignore the bits you don’t have an answer for and only respond to the bits you do think you have something to say about. > > I don’t doubt that ‘debate’ is often treated as a combative game, in which the aim is to win by any means. For myself, I prefer to think of it as a way in which ‘opposing’ ideas can be explored in order to reach common ground - much as those truly interested in equality would be looking for ways to reach true equality, rather than just fanatically grasping anything they can for their side and refusing to let go of anything they already have. > > I should have stated more clearly that yes, I agree that men who are falsely accused of rape (like any innocent person falsely accused of any crime, for that matter) have a lot of pain. And no, I disagree that it should be considered acceptable not to spare somebody the pain of a false accusation merely because it might provide a beneficial learning experience for them in some other respects. > > So, I’ll just choose one element of that bulk of the post that you ignored, and press you for a reasoned response: > > What would constitute ‘equality’ now? How do we reach it, and how do we reach agreement on it? That’s not an explanation of how the wage gap is “mythical”, that’s merely an attempt to explain why the wage gap is _justified_. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/90 "2015-11-09T16:50:32Z")
> [@A\_isha](#): > > That’s not an explanation of how the wage gap is “mythical”, that’s merely an attempt to explain why the wage gap is _justified_. I think you meant to quote post #84, not #82. ---
**Author:** ![A\_isha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@A\_isha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_isha)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/91 "2015-11-09T17:09:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > I think you meant to quote post #84, not #82. Gaah, you’re right. ---
**Author:** ![A\_isha](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@A\_isha](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A_isha)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/92 "2015-11-09T17:20:11Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > No, I meant in the way it’s most often encountered - something along the lines of ‘women earn 70 cents on the dollar compared to men. Women should be paid the same as men for the same work’. > > But they are. It’s the law (and if it weren’t, there’d be a lot more unemployed men - shareholders would demand it). > > As for the ‘gender pay gap’ you’re pushing, please link me to your campaign encouraging women to stop having babies and start choosing dirty, dangerous jobs that pay better than the jobs they’re currently choosing. Expressing a ‘gender pay gap’ as a feminist argument (with the implicit demand that men do something about it) does not empower women. > > Who spends the money men earn, by the way? Who makes the purchasing decisions in mixed-gender households? Do you factor that in at all? Men earn money and give it to women to spend (or women take it from, in divorce courts - most ‘deadbeat’ ex-partners, by the way, those who fail to pay maintenance to ex-partners and caregivers, are women). > > And what’s your solution to the problem of men and women being different, and economics naturally favouring work, production, value and so on (because economics isn’t a patriarchal sexist invention, you understand that, right?) > > Are women to be paid for their mere existence? Are all men now responsible for all women’s economic well-being (but not vice versa, that’s not the kind of equality we want, eh?) > > Find me a woman who wants a line-manager for her role as woman. How many would accept performance related pay? Will all women be saved from poverty? How about all men? Attacking poverty, and structures that have nothing to do with gender but everything to do with keeping the power of money in the hands of those who already have it (plenty of whom are women, ostensibly feminist women, who don’t a flying \*\*\*\* for poor women). > > Here’s a thing - maybe, instead of just trying to throw your faeces at those who don’t share your cultish ideology, you could actually dig into the ideas and explore ways of reaching equality for everyone. That’s not an explanation of how the wage gap is “mythical”, that’s merely an attempt to explain why the wage gap is _justified._ ---
**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/93 "2015-11-09T17:46:13Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Meanwhile, where they can’t find actual problems, they make them up: hysteria about fake rape crises on college campuses, for example, and misleading statistics about a supposed “earnings gap.” Cite? > [@](#): > > At the same time, evidence of the toll on men and boys [continues to mount](http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/women-now-33-more-likely-men-earn-college-degrees): > > The vast majority of teachers in elementary school are women, and [boys suffer from it](http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2014/04/30/boys_are_struggling_in_school_why_everyone_should_care_about_the_gender.html) Not evidence for “the toll on men of feminism.” Regarding “feminism”: Cue Inigo Montoya: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.” > [@](#): > > Meanwhile, even as fathers are spending more time with their children than ever, divorce courts continue to give custody to women: according to the US Census Bureau, [mothers get custody after a divorce 82.2% of the time](http://www.census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-240.pdf). Quite possibly, this is proof that more feminism is required, to offset this cultural sex bias. Of course, there might be other explanations. But it’s not an outcome of feminism, except to the extent that women are no longer considered chattel of men, with the concomitant assumption that after divorce, all “assets” (including children) devolve to males. Seriously, do you have an argument here? > [@](#): > > Given that 50% of marriages end in divorce, and women initiate divorce 70% of the time, perhaps it’s not surprising men are getting increasingly leery of marriage. Particularly for men who have heavily invested themselves in their marriages and children, the consequences of divorce can be devastating. [This study](http://jech.bmj.com/content/57/12/993.full), for example, found that men were 9 times more like to commit suicide after a divorce than women. I bet men are more likely to commit suicide than women in general. Once again, you take a fact and assume it’s evidence for some case against feminism, without making any actual connection to feminism. > [@](#): > > There is a price, though, for all this male-bashing (literal, and figurative). More and more men are simply opting out of long-term relationships with women. Women say it’s because men are childish, and need to “man-up”. There is another possibility, though: perhaps men are simply looking at the risk/benefit ratio of marriage, and deciding it’s not worth it. An idea is not responsible for its apologists. Feminism is simply the idea that women should have equal rights and responsibilities as men. Do some women dress up their misnadry as feminism? Of course they do. Should we object? Sure. Many of your objections fall into this category. They are not arguments against feminism, but rather, of some feminists. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2015, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/94 "2015-11-09T18:11:09Z")
> [@Learjeff](#): > > Feminism is simply the idea that women should have equal rights and responsibilities as men. Do some women dress up their misnadry as feminism? Of course they do. Should we object? Sure. Many of your objections fall into this category. They are not arguments against feminism, but rather, of some feminists. From your lips to… oh, nevermind… :smack: ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2015, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/95 "2015-11-10T00:10:41Z")
> [@Hilarity\_N.Suze](#): > > All right. Formerly card-carrying bra-burning feminist here to answer your questions. > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by LinusK View Post > > Ok. So what kind of feminism do you support? > > > > …I don’t know if you have young children. If you don’t, you can ignore the following question. I’m sure you know about half of marriages end in divorce, and I’m sure that won’t happen to you, but if it did, are you OK with becoming an every-other-weekend dad? > > I am all for joint custody. I think one of the ways to help women achieve their career goals is to even out the responsibility for rearing children. Currently, it is more a burden on women and as a feminist, I think it shouldn’t be. Yes, I said “burden.” When someone has to take a day off to stay home with a sick child, who is it? Usually the mom. When someone is in charge of getting kids to an after-school activity, usually it’s the mom. I say “usually” but during my child-raising days we both did it, depending on who these these duties would impact less with regard to the job, or maybe just because it was the other person’s turn. This is pretty much a pillar of feminism, equality of child-raising. Also note that couples with one daughter are 5% more likely to divorce than couples with one son. This rate goes up along with the number of daughters. Hm. Not sure where you’re going with the daughters, but I’m glad you support shared custody. You should know though, if you don’t - that you’re out of step with NOW, which opposes shared custody, and paints fathers who want it as abusers. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Quote: > > Do you think that being male is a genetic disorder? > > No. Good grief. Can you imagine the shit-storm if “The Journal of Higher Education” published an article arguing that women were genetically defective, because they were missing the Y chromosome? They didn’t do that of course. You can look at [what what they did say](http://chronicle.com/article/The-End-of-Male-Supremacy/228769/#comments-anchor), if you like. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Quote: > > Do you think the concept of manhood should be abolished? > > So there is one widely accepted concept of manhood? I don’t think there is. If the “concept of manhood” is that the man is always smarter and should be in charge, then I think it should be abolished. You are of course, free to think what you like, but there is such a thing as masculinity. And we know it, because when they see it, women are attracted to it. Describing it to beyond what I’m prepared to do right now, but I will say this: one of the things women are attracted to, is men who are in charge. Feminists may hate that - and they do - but instead of looking at themselves, they’ve chosen the path of shaming men for being masculine. It’s counterproductive, mean-spirited, and unhealthy. But it’s what they do. > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Quote: > > Do you believe, ““Intercourse is the pure, sterile, formal expression of contempt for women”? > > Pure? Sterile? Formal? No, this statement is ridiculous on many levels. I agree. It was written by Andrea Dworkin, a leading 2nd wave feminist, in her book “Intercourse.” > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > Quote: > > … > > Do you think feminism means women should be able to do whatever they want to do; and if so, does the same thing apply to men? > > Where on earth are you getting these ideas? Well, here’s one example: [Why Women Need To Start Asking Men Out…Because Men Have No Balls](http://elitedaily.com/dating/men-pssies-women-need-start-asking-men-dates/746965/) > [@](#): > > I don’t think ANYONE should be able to do whatever they want to do if it involves tromping over other people, and I think both sexes should be equally free to do what they want to do within that constraint. > > The kind of feminism I support is one where one sex is not held in contempt by the other sex. Where little boys playing baseball who do it badly are not caustically referred to as “girls.” Where older boys playing football who do it ineptly are not caustically referred to as “ladies.” Where people of either sex are not shunted into an occupation because of their sex, or kept out of an occupation because of their sex. This includes not forcing girls to pretend they love STEM and it also includes not telling boys they are sissies if they ironed their ROTC uniform themselves. And so on. All that is admirable, and in an ideal world - unlike the one we live in - I’d cheer you on. But men who fail to be men are simply failures. Now, ironing your own ROTC uniform doesn’t make you a failure. But failing to become a man does. And feminists are hard at work making that transition - from boy to man - ever more difficult. Which isn’t to say it wasn’t difficult already. > [@](#): > > Now I will agree that feminism or something like it has gone too far in certain areas, one of which is sexual harassment, or hostile work environment. Really, the thing feminists wanted to prevent, originally, was something on the order of, “Blow me, or you’ll lose your job.” (Which happened.) But there was more than one thing at work here. One was the threat to livelihood, when women were a lot more limited in where they could work, so it was an actual threat. Another was the power imbalance, “I can make you do this.” As women’s job horizons expanded, the first part went away and the answer to “Blow me or you’ll lose your job” became, “Eat shit, I quit.” But the second part didn’t go away, it just got transferred so it’s not an exclusively male thing (and now it’s “I can ruin your life”). All the other stuff, like whether a coworker makes a pass or hangs up some porn in a locker is just interpersonal human stuff that can go on regardless of what sex you are. But current laws have people walking on eggshells. PC out of control. > > And I am certainly not denying that “evidence of discrimination against women disappears.” There has been a lot of progress, of the type I hoped for 40 years ago. Ms. Magazine used to have a back page where it showed instances in advertising or other media of how women were negatively portrayed, or treated as sexual objects only, or treated as dumb, with the tagline, “Click!” The most recent one I saw (and that was several years ago) had a picture of a female plumber under the sink with her whale-tail showing and IMO that was not a “Click!”, that was an endorsement for (a) women in nontraditional jobs, and (b) one way to combat plumber’s crack. I thought, “Is that the best Ms. Magazine can do these days?” And then I thought, “Well, good.” We live in a post-feminist world now. But it’s a world where men need to learn to stop walking on egg shells. Women only despise the men who do, and the men who do it wind up despising themselves. ---
**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:** [November 10, 2015, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/96 "2015-11-10T00:41:53Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Not sure where you’re going with the daughters, but I’m glad you support shared custody. You should know though, if you don’t - that you’re out of step with NOW, which opposes shared custody, and paints fathers who want it as abusers. Your previous cites from NOW don’t support this – they support the claim that NOW opposes any default to shared custody. I agree with NOW on that – there should be no default. Shared custody is appropriate in some situations, and I’ve seen nothing to suggest that NOW claims that any father who wants shared custody is abusive. NOW opposes a presumption of joint custody, as do I – there should be no presumption at all, and every situation should be judged on its merits. > [@](#): > > You are of course, free to think what you like, but there is such a thing as masculinity. And we know it, because when they see it, women are attracted to it. Describing it to beyond what I’m prepared to do right now, but I will say this: one of the things women are attracted to, is men who are in charge. > > Feminists may hate that - and they do - but instead of looking at themselves, they’ve chosen the path of shaming men for being masculine. It’s counterproductive, mean-spirited, and unhealthy. But it’s what they do. I don’t accept that you know what all women are attracted to. Some women may be attracted to traditional displays of masculinity, and some are not. Some men are attracted to traditional displays of femininity, and others are not. Certain aspects of traditional masculinity and femininity – that men should be aggressive, that violence and rage are acceptable, that men must be in charge and women must be submissive, and more – are very negative and should be challenged and criticized. > [@](#): > > All that is admirable, and in an ideal world - unlike the one we live in - I’d cheer you on. But men who fail to be men are simply failures. Now, ironing your own ROTC uniform doesn’t make you a failure. But failing to become a man does. And feminists are hard at work making that transition - from boy to man - ever more difficult. Which isn’t to say it wasn’t difficult already. > > We live in a post-feminist world now. But it’s a world where men need to learn to stop walking on egg shells. Women only despise the men who do, and the men who do it wind up despising themselves. I don’t accept your implication that men who might reject aspects of traditional masculinity are failures. Some of these aspects are bad and should be rejected. Men are not inherently better leaders than women, and women are not inherently better parents than men. I don’t accept that you know what all women want, desire, or despise. Some women may be like this but many are not. Claiming you have some special knowledge of what women as a whole really truly desire or despise is very foolish and presumptuous, in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2015, 6:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/97 "2015-11-10T06:44:48Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Can you imagine the shit-storm if “The Journal of Higher Education” published an article arguing that women were genetically defective, because they were missing the Y chromosome? > > They didn’t do that of course. > > You can look at [what what they did say](http://chronicle.com/article/The-End-of-Male-Supremacy/228769/#comments-anchor), if you like. Stop the presses. I agree with you. The idiot who wrote that article should be roundly mocked for making baseless sweeping generalizations and pulling unfounded conclusions out of his ass. > [@LinusK](#): > > You are of course, free to think what you like, but there is such a thing as masculinity. And we know it, because when they see it, women are attracted to it. Describing it to beyond what I’m prepared to do right now, but I will say this: one of the things women are attracted to, is men who are in charge. > > Feminists may hate that - and they do - but instead of looking at themselves, they’ve chosen the path of shaming men for being masculine. It’s counterproductive, mean-spirited, and unhealthy. But it’s what they do. > > We live in a post-feminist world now. But it’s a world where men need to learn to stop walking on egg shells. Women only despise the men who do, and the men who do it wind up despising themselves. But of course, you’re already very familiar with that form of rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2015, 1:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/98 "2015-11-10T13:24:05Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > Debatable, of course, but on the available evidence the most active, vocal feminists here have got nothing more important to do than hang around in the Pit (where they don’t even have to pretend to be deploying facts and reliable figures) insulting LK and myself for the thought-crime of questioning their perverted definition of ‘equality’. > > That said, if any of their petty barbs were ever to hit a vital organ and LK or I were to come to some damascene revelation, perhaps that _would_ change history and radically restructure third-world countries (the go-to arguments for feminists who can’t claim white western women are oppressed with a straight face). > > Come on, Linus! You, and you alone (since I’m your sock, they say ;)) have the power to alter historical fact and liberate millions of women. Well, not the first one, obviously (though you do have the power to accept your collective responsibility for what some other chaps did some long time ago). As for the second one, I’d advise not using feminism as your tool, because it turns out that berating white western men (while demanding the right to emulate them) has done nothing for women in the developing world, even after decades of bra-burning, slut walks and aggressively shutting down criticism. I’m all for equality - although I will say that feminists have a pattern of taking credit for every bit of historical progress, despite the support of millions of men who also supported equality along the way. The 19th Amendment, for example, was supported by an overwhelming number of Congressmen (I assume they were men) as well as the legislatures of most states (as would have to be the case, to pass a Constitutional Amendment). Feminism, on the other hand, has a long history of misandry, falsification of facts and statistics, and a habit of elevating any perceived slight against women to epic proportions, while actively attacking anyone who points to real - and harmful - discrimination against men. It does not, in other words, have anything to do with equality. It’s more like a tribal religion. The relentless personal attacks and Pit threads are verification. Whenever a group is mostly concerned with _shutting someone up_ it shows the weakness of their own position. Feminism has long outlived any legitimate purpose it might have had. ---
**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:** [November 10, 2015, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/99 "2015-11-10T13:36:27Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Feminism, on the other hand, has a long history of misandry, falsification of facts and statistics, and a habit of elevating any perceived slight against women to epic proportions, while actively attacking anyone who points to real - and harmful - discrimination against men. It does not, in other words, have anything to do with equality. It’s more like a tribal religion. The relentless personal attacks and Pit threads are verification. Whenever a group is mostly concerned with _shutting someone up_ it shows the weakness of their own position. Feminism has long outlived any legitimate purpose it might have had. Your caricature of feminism seems to have these qualities, but the feminism that I know and practice, and the feminism of the feminists I know, does not. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2015, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/100 "2015-11-10T13:41:27Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Whenever a group is mostly concerned with _shutting someone up_ it shows the weakness of their own position. …says the man trying to shut up feminists. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801.md?page=6)