# 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:** 7
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/121 "2015-11-11T13:32:09Z")
> [@ddsun](#): > > I know the difference between the Pit and GD has been explained to you. Oddly, many people prefer to express their frustrations with the same old re-tread in the Pit thread, rather than bothering to repeat themselves here, where they are generally ignored. > > Some of us, against all common sense, post in both places. My last post in this thread was ignored. > > In the meantime, in this thread, we cycle over the same ground. We have, again, had to cover the genetic defect issue. We’re covering custody, again. We’re covering IPV, again. Any attempt to move debate forward is ignored. > > IMO, this is a witnessing thread, like the others. It trends dangerously towards hate speech at times, but apparently does so within the rules. You (plural) haven’t covered them: you’ve dismissed them and/or attempted to justify them, and/or claimed they don’t exist. The point is to show that feminism is not _for equality_; it’s _for women._ If feminism was _for equality_, you all would give a shit. You don’t. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/122 "2015-11-11T13:36:50Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > No, the point is that women _have historically_ been oppressed throughout much of human history by declaring them unworthy of (or incapable of) legal and social equality with men. And that remnants of these oppressive legal and social structures persist in varying degrees even today, even in developed societies where women have achieved formal legal equality. > > The “pillar” or fundamental principle of feminism is that this traditional legal and social inequality should be rejected as oppressive (to women and men both, in different ways) because women _are_ inherently worthy and capable of legal and social equality with men. OK. Let’s assume for the sake of the argument that women have been “historically oppressed”. It’s almost 2016. Which legal and social institutions oppress women today? ---
**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 11, 2015, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/123 "2015-11-11T13:44:57Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > mainstream feminism There’s this one too, of course. ‘Myself and my friends aren’t extremists’. ‘You’re talking about a _fringe_’. All of that tosh, unsupported and largely irrelevant. Let’s suppose that everyone here is ‘Not That Sort of Feminist’ (that nobody’s just saying so as an exercise in unaccountability, for example). Bravo. By all means be proud of that, and of your place here at SDMB. Which I only stumbled on by chance, never having once seen, heard or read of it in relation to feminism. So there’s no mainstream here, though there may be a benign backwater. Mainstream feminism is out there, active and unequally seeking ‘equality’ (for a given meaning of ‘meaning’…) And how does ‘I and…yes, him, he’s said so, and her, I know, and look, other posters too’ relate to a discussion of feminism? ‘Only feminists can say what feminism is (and only we can tell you when we don’t need you to do as you’re told anymore. Read your memos!)’ doesn’t sound like an equality movement - it sounds like a priesthood. A cult of victimisation, offerings via patreon (with an eye to state sponsorship). ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/124 "2015-11-11T13:52:04Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Finally, “rape culture”, or the popular trivialization and normalization of rape as something that’s “no big deal” or is somehow the victim’s fault, does indeed exist, and oppresses both women and men. (So does the popular trivialization and normalization of violence committed by women against men, by the way.) Rape is one of the most serious crimes a person can commit. In my state, the punishment ranges from 20 years to life in prison. Not too long ago, people were executed for rape. So far as I can tell, “rape culture” is about redefining rape to include things like drunk sex, and sex a woman later regrets. _That_ trivializes rape. ---
**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:** [November 11, 2015, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/125 "2015-11-11T13:54:44Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > Sooooo feminism is to blame how exactly? And this is why both sides are always talking past each other in these threads. There’s so much bullshit that grants rotten women a pass on in this society. If they can manipulate feminist doctrine to get it: “I’m oppressed!” they will. If they can fall back on the compensatory privileges from the patriarchy: “I’m a delicate little flower” they will. They’ll switch gears without a thought, because it’s not about adhering to one set of convictions,. it’s all about getting what they want no matter what, just like any rotten person does. I’d like to address this as a case-by case thing, just as when minorities play the race card: this is NOT an indictment of an entire race or sex, nor their struggle: it’s one bad individual and we need to shut his or her shit down. But that’s easier said than done. I do have to criticize feminists because, so many times, you won’t hear\* “I am a feminist and is an abuse of feminism,”\* but there will always be a chorus of \*“Oh you go girl!” \*so in answer to \*\*QuickSilver \*\*, with respect: feminists may not have the responsibility to correct this, but they do have the most credibility to do so. If they please would. Not according to my biased sensitivities, but a reasonable person would expect that to happen at least once in a while, you’d think? What’s up with that? The “don’t air dirty laundry” doctrine? ---
**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 11, 2015, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/126 "2015-11-11T14:15:58Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > The point is to show that feminism is not _for equality_; it’s _for women._ > > If feminism was _for equality_, you all would give a shit. You don’t. Feminism is for both. I understand we disagree what feminism is, and this is unlikely to be bridged. But considering that most of the feminists I know and read about are much closer to my version than to yours, we’re not going to stop calling ourselves feminists. Do you have anything to say to these feminists, like me, who are confident in our feminism that’s very different from your version of feminism, aside from “you’re not real feminists”? ---
**Author:** ![even\_sven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/dfb087/32.png) [@even\_sven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/even_sven)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/127 "2015-11-11T14:22:27Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > Rape is one of the most serious crimes a person can commit. In my state, the punishment ranges from 20 years to life in prison. Not too long ago, people were executed for rape. > > So far as I can tell, “rape culture” is about redefining rape to include things like drunk sex, and sex a woman later regrets. _That_ trivializes rape. Do you mean the women that are incapacitated to the point that they are unable to understand that they are having sex that you were talking about earlier? ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/128 "2015-11-11T14:30:52Z")
> [@lance\_strongarm](#): > > But now you have to tell me why you use merit for admission at all. > > If the goal is to educate the undereducated, economically marginalized underclass, we should allow anyone in that class to get into any college, right? Excluded middle much? Factoring in non-merit criteria doesn’t mean merit doesn’t count. And it doesn’t mean the only goal of higher education is to help the underclass. > [@](#): > > If it results in some of them not getting to go to the school at all because they were displaced by a “diversity” candidate who otherwise wouldn’t qualify, it doesn’t help them much, does it? This statement makes no sense if you’re looking at net gains. If diversity admissions result in the matriculation of more men than would have otherwise occurred, then it is inarguable that it collectively helps them a lot. And honestly, if someone ends us not \*getting into school at all \*because they were “displaced by a diversity candidate” then they obviously aren’t trying very hard and thus, are probably not a very competitive student. > [@](#): > > I’m simplifying, of course, but that’s the point. College admission is competitive. It shouldn’t be surprising that someone cares more about their own admission based on the hard work they did to get the grades and all the rest, and then sees someone put ahead of them in line based on skin color or sex - after being told skin color and sex shouldn’t matter, and **knowing that it would be illegal if skin color or sex were used in admissions if the victims were not white and male.** But it’s not illegal, so what are you talking about? Men are gaining entry into college with grades and test scores that their female counterparts (whites or otherwise) are not. Many white men persist in ignoring this reality because it causes a bunch of cognitive dissonance, but I don’t know how much longer heads can stay in the sand here. According to the article I cited earlier, AA for men has been going on for years and yet consistently white men portray AA as something that is anti-white male. > [@](#): > > You may be willing to explain why it’s worth it to them, but you shouldn’t be incredulous that they don’t just accept it with open arms. I’m not incredulous, actually. I understand perfectly well why white men might be relunctant to acknowledge that they benefit from the same very initiatives they have long derided as unfair and discriminatory. Human psychology being what it is, this is to be expected. But it is fascinating to watch the cognitive dissonance play out. So I’m curious. Do you want colleges to stop giving admission points to men in the interest of diversity? If this stopped happening and campuses became overwhelmingly female overnight, would you be okay with this trend? Or should we be concerned about how this might effect social stability? I’m thinking of all those suicidal middle aged whites we are talking about in another thread. > [@](#): > > You have to wait and see before you smugly conclude that they’re all selfish hypocrites. Or you could just tell me what your response would be. I mean, if I wrong in my conclusions, surely you can do a better job than this in telling me why. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/129 "2015-11-11T14:32:50Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Are you unaware that men benefit from Affirmative Active now in college admissions? [Yes, that’s right](http://www.cbsnews.com/news/men-far-more-likely-to-benefit-from-affirmative-action-in-college-admissions/). So they have their champions, despite historically benefiting from centuries of advantage. > > I shouldn’t be surprised that no one has yet pointed this out. This board has a massive blind spot when it comes to AA. MIT is close to 50% women now. It’s something they’ve worked hard at for some time. They have [special dorms for women](http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/mit_women), and a special [admissions program](http://wtp.mit.edu/application.html). And frankly, if I were in charge of MIT, I’d want the student body to as close to 50/50 as possible. MIT doesn’t make it’s admissions decisions easily accessible (or at least I couldn’t find them), but according to [at least one source](https://www.quora.com/MIT-Is-it-easier-to-get-into-MIT-if-you-are-a-woman), a female applicant is about two and half times as likely to get in: “in 2011 the acceptance rate for women was 26% and for men was 10%.” And frankly, if I was in charge of MIT, I’d do the same thing. Not because I’m pro-affirmative action, but because I’d be pro-MIT: MIT is a better school if the student body has an approximate 1:1 ratio. It’s a better school both for women and for men, but especially for men. And if you’re looking to draw the best applicants possible, you want a school where there are women, because most high school boys want to go to a college where there are women for them to meet. I assume that what’s true for MIT is true for other schools as well. I suspect that’s why women’s colleges have consortiums with other schools: because the girls and women who go to those schools want a chance to meet guys and men. A school that’s 65% women and 35% men (like the one in your link) might be a great school to go to if you’re a guy; probably not so great if you’re a woman. If you were a (heterosexual) HS student, and you’re looking at which college to go to, do you really want to go to a school where girls outnumber guys 2:1? ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/130 "2015-11-11T15:12:49Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > MIT is close to 50% women now. It’s something they’ve worked hard at for some time. They have [special dorms for women](http://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/mit_women), and a special [admissions program](http://wtp.mit.edu/application.html). Yes, colleges that historically have been predominantly male try their best to entice female students for the sake of diversity. My own alma mater (Ga Tech) does the same. But the cite I provided shows that when you look at colleges as a group, admitting more _males_ is of greater concern. So you see men getting in with less stellar qualifications than women. MIT and Ga Tech are outliers. So doesn’t this undermine your argument that feminism has caused society to ignore the educational well-being of males? Feminism has helped society understand the importance of gender diversity, and encourages us to challenge the status quo. Without it, MIT would still be a sausage fest–a prospect you yourself find undesirable. ---
**Author:** ![Ruken](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f475e1/32.png) [@Ruken](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ruken)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/131 "2015-11-11T15:16:49Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > It’s almost 2016. Which legal and social institutions oppress women today? A hell of a lot fewer than almost 1916, but the following possibilities come to mind: Resume discrimination (doi: 10.1073/pnas.1211286109) Mandatory ultrasound laws Penalizing women for negotiating higher salaries (doi: 10.1016/j.obhdp.2006.09.001) Unequal childcare allocation when both parents work (and unequal opportunity; right or wrong, fathers may not have the same leave options as mothers) ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/132 "2015-11-11T15:41:19Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > And frankly, if I was in charge of MIT, I’d do the same thing. Not because I’m pro-affirmative action, but because I’d be pro-MIT: MIT is a better school if the student body has an approximate 1:1 ratio. It’s a better school both for women and for men, but especially for men. And if you’re looking to draw the best applicants possible, you want a school where there are women, because most high school boys want to go to a college where there are women for them to meet. Your thesis that men are the “best applicants” for MIT does not appear to be supported by fact. But leaving that aside for the moment, your assumption that male students are incapable of thinking about anything but getting laid is quite demeaning to men, and young men in particular. Why you would so contemptuously perpetuate such a harmful stereotype is beyond me. ---
**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 11, 2015, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/133 "2015-11-11T16:51:08Z")
> [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > And this is why both sides are always talking past each other in these threads. Very well. Let’s try to remedy that. > [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > There’s so much bullshit that grants rotten women a pass on in this society. If they can manipulate feminist doctrine to get it: “I’m oppressed!” they will. If they can fall back on the compensatory privileges from the patriarchy: “I’m a delicate little flower” they will. They’ll switch gears without a thought, because it’s not about adhering to one set of convictions,. it’s all about getting what they want no matter what, just like any rotten person does. Could not agree more. Rotten people will game whatever system they can use to their advantage. > [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > I’d like to address this as a case-by case thing, just as when minorities play the race card: this is NOT an indictment of an entire race or sex, nor their struggle: it’s one bad individual and we need to shut his or her shit down. But that’s easier said than done. Also completely agree. Easier said than done and far too little is said or done about these individual cases. For my part, I try to call out bullshit whenever I smell it. I’ve no doubt you do as well. What else can be done to encourage this sort of calling out of b.s.? > [@Slithy\_Tove](#): > > I do have to criticize feminists because, so many times, you won’t hear\* “I am a feminist and [this] is an abuse of feminism,”\* but there will always be a chorus of \*“Oh you go girl!” \*so in answer to \*\*QuickSilver \*\*, with respect: feminists may not have the responsibility to correct this, but they do have the most credibility to do so. If they please would. Not according to my biased sensitivities, but a reasonable person would expect that to happen at least once in a while, you’d think? It’s completely understandable that you would expect this to happen and of course calling a spade a spade is the right thing to do. But the cynic in me wonders if human nature prohibits this from occuring with the frequency and volume that it ought to. In other words, is it fair to single out feminists for the failing of humanity in general? Additionally, I would ask you this: Is it aggression rather than stupidy that causes more people to be carried with the flow of whatever socio-political trend du jour? I’d argue most people (feminists included) are intellectually lazy and it’s the latter, not the former. ---
**Author:** ![LinusK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/258eb7/32.png) [@LinusK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LinusK)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/134 "2015-11-11T17:11:23Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > What I said was “women are inherently worthy and capable of legal and social equality with men”. > \ I agree. Feminists, not so much: 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.” Mary Daly: “If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.” Sally Miller Gearhart: “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” Andrea Dworkin: “All personal, psychological, social, and institutionalized domination on this earth can be traced back to its source: the phallic identities of men” ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/135 "2015-11-11T17:14:52Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > I agree. > > Feminists, not so much: Over and over we call you out on the blatant logical fallacy that your entire world is based on. Over and over, you just keep doing it. You are clearly not here to prove anything, just to make yourself feel good. ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/136 "2015-11-11T17:20:54Z")
> [@LinusK](#): > > 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.” As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position. > [@LinusK](#): > > Mary Daly: “If life is to survive on this planet, there must be a decontamination of the Earth. I think this will be accompanied by an evolutionary process that will result in a drastic reduction of the population of males.” As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position. > [@LinusK](#): > > Sally Miller Gearhart: “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position. > [@LinusK](#): > > Andrea Dworkin: “All personal, psychological, social, and institutionalized domination on this earth can be traced back to its source: the phallic identities of men” As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly con… Wait! Is she calling all men dicks?! Happy?.. ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/137 "2015-11-11T17:31:32Z")
> [@QuickSilver](#): > > As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position. > > As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position. > > As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly condemn this misandric extremist position. > > As a self-identifying mainstream feminist, I strongly con… Wait! Is she calling all men dicks?! > > Happy?.. I’ll second all this. ---
**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 11, 2015, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/138 "2015-11-11T17:41:11Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > There’s this one too, of course. ‘Myself and my friends aren’t extremists’. ‘You’re talking about a _fringe_’. All of that tosh, unsupported and largely irrelevant. Let’s suppose that everyone here is ‘Not That Sort of Feminist’ (that nobody’s just saying so as an exercise in unaccountability, for example). Bravo. By all means be proud of that, and of your place here at SDMB. Which I only stumbled on by chance, never having once seen, heard or read of it in relation to feminism. So there’s no mainstream here, though there may be a benign backwater. Mainstream feminism is out there, active and unequally seeking ‘equality’ (for a given meaning of ‘meaning’…) > > And how does ‘I and…yes, him, he’s said so, and her, I know, and look, other posters too’ relate to a discussion of feminism? ‘Only feminists can say what feminism is (and only we can tell you when we don’t need you to do as you’re told anymore. Read your memos!)’ doesn’t sound like an equality movement - it sounds like a priesthood. A cult of victimisation, offerings via patreon (with an eye to state sponsorship). Tell me this, **Jack** , would you be equally as likely to go around telling atheists what their policies, beliefs and leaders are while at once dismissing their thoughts on the matter? Just wondering because it seems that your prefered form of argument is to presume that you already know the answer while implying that everyone else is lying to you about their’s. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2015, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/139 "2015-11-11T17:45:07Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’ll second all this. Thirded. (With one exception: I agree with Morgan’s underlying thesis that “the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” I disagree with her misandric application of 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 11, 2015, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801/140 "2015-11-11T17:49:56Z")
> [@Jack\_of\_Words](#): > > And the best antidote to condescension is pretension? (I’m not sure you want to imply you were truly ‘overwhelmed’, for example, but it does have a lot of syllables) Ah, abuse. Not very original abuse, mind, which is a tad disappointing coming from someone claiming to be a professional wordsmith. > [@](#): > > I do condescend, from time to time. More often than I try to undermine individuals whose ideas I disapprove of, as some posters are inclined to do\*\*\*\*\*, And perhaps someday you’ll succeed. > [@](#): > > but less often than I treat everyone around with me with compassion and generosity regardless of the trivial things so many people seem obsessed by - gender, for example, or height or wealth or abs etc. Any chance of demonstrating it? > [@](#): > > I condescend to those who warrant it (regardless of gender, height, wealth or abs etc). I imagine you do the same (though it’s possible you flagellate yourself afterwards). On this occasion, I judged it warrented, and I see no reason to seek (or accept unsolicited) anyone’s elses judgement. I am truly honored to have been judged worthy. > [@](#): > > Are feminists seeking to ban condescension now? I may have missed that memo - or seen it, idly observed “Fruitcakes!” and moved on. You should have made your point more clearly, perhaps. I don’t speak for all “feminists”, but I find it hard to believe your stated predilection for “treating everyone around with me with compassion and generosity” when the evidence at hand suggests a more frequently-realized predilection for talking down to everyone in this thread, and particularly women. > [@](#): > > There we are you see, you’ve leapt ungainly to an ugly conclusion. I assumed from your question, brief as it was (and devoid of some inflection that was no doubt in your head), that you hadn’t heard the word before. Helpfully, I suggested where you might have encountered it. But it seems you were questioning my right to use the word. Did I miss another memo from the fruitcakes? How amusing to be accused of leaping to the wrong conclusion while watching you do that very thing three times in rapid succession. > [@](#): > > I am grateful for your feedback, random internet user. Regarding your poor experience of a JackofWords product, here at JackofWords the philosophy is ‘If it’s free, the customer knows where he can stuff his opinions’. Please accept this complimentary voucher, which could be redeemed for a rolling doughnut, probably. Thank you for the doughnut. I know just where I can stuff it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/on-feminism/736801.md?page=8)