Do you think the purpose of feminist theory

[boston bean]

is to bash men and criticize men?

or

Do you think its purpose is to further equality for women?

Just checking....

20 votes, 8 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Bash men and criticize men
	2 (10%)
	Further equality for women
	18 (90%)
	8 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[MineralMan]

1. I think, like most theories, it is an academic

theory, helping to understand feminism and the need for feminism, more than anything else. The binary nature of this poll makes it impossible for me to vote for either choice.

[boston bean]

2. All DU polls offer "pass", without the OP adding it.

You can choose that if you like, and explain how you think the purpose is also to bash and criticize men.

[MineralMan]

4. I did choose that option.

However, you are mistaken. I do not think feminism's purpose is to bash and criticize men at all. I think it is to end the inequality of women. The theory, however, is a different thing. Theories attempt to understand the mechanisms that create something. In the case of feminism, the reason for the theory is the patriarchal society.

My reason for choosing the pass option is the misuse of the word "theory."

[Egalitarian Thug]

7. The idea that women are of equal status is "an academic theory"?

[MineralMan]

16. No, of course not. Feminist theory

explains why that is so and how that equality has been trampled on by a patriarchal society. Theory has a specific meaning.

[boston bean]

19. And the reason for acknowledging it, reading it and using it, is??

[MineralMan]

21. That was not the question asked by your poll.

I support the goals of feminism 100%. I also support the use of the English language properly. That is why I did not select one of the two options you provided in the poll. And that is the only reason.

[boston bean]

24. I don't get it. whatever.

the question was clear... if its purpose was to bash and criticize men, or to further equality for women.

Theory is used to understand the cause and effects. Learning and applying that theory is in the pursuit of equality for women, not just with laws, but within a society that has cultural inequalities.

[MineralMan]

31. It's purely a language issue.

You wrote a binary poll, but asked a question that cannot be answered correctly with either answer. Like several other people, I chose not to vote in the poll because of its binary nature and because of the misuse of the word theory. I care about language.

That you assumed that I would have voted for the first option is a mistake. I support absolute equality for all people. I did not vote for either, due to the ambiguous nature of your binary pair of choices.

[boston bean]

33. There is no misuse of the word theory.

[MineralMan]

35. Theories seek to explain things. That is their purpose.

Neither poll option had anything to do with that. That's my last comment on this subject.

[boston bean]

46. ok, still think you could have chosen an option.

no need for you to say anything further.

[geek tragedy]

3. I vote 'pass' because I understand the goal to be the

undermining of the patriarchy, not the lesser-included goal of equality with men. Of course there must be equality, but according to whose terms, assumptions and metrics?

[geek tragedy]

5. But, given that I just said that the goal includes equality for women,

I'll change my answer to "promote equality" with the caveat that promoting equality isn't enough.

[redqueen]

6. Isn't it only radical feminists who focus on overthrowing the patriarchy?

I thought there were other forms which focused on laws, and achieving equality with men via said laws, with no focus at all on the heirarchical power structure of society.

[geek tragedy]

9. I can only communicate my basic understanding of the term.

As far as who's radical and what radical is etc I'm not a voting member of the movement, just an ally.

My understanding is that legal and social equality for a women is the floor, not the ceiling, as far as what feminists seek.

Laws can only accomplish so much.

[boston bean]

11. True, but it is still equality that is sought.

[geek tragedy]

14. I guess I think of it as "why should women settle for being

equal to men?"

[Helen Reddy]

28. Yep.

My standards are a wee bit higher.

[geek tragedy]

29. Just to be clear, men should not settle for being equal to what we are

either.

[Bonobo]

8. Based on some of the recent trivial issue...

One could say it is a form of entertainment and self-stimulation.

Or it could be a way of fighting the demons raging in some tormented souls.

For the academics, it could also be a way of perpetuating their careers and getting grants...

Lots of possibilities.

There certainly are lots of issues to be discussed and boundaries to be overcome before both men and women have everything they want, but when I read about "benevolent sexism" I basically think the people have been blowing smoke up their asses in a university environment for too long OR they are such privileged people that their list of offenses to rally against has become "precious".

[geek tragedy]

13. This may be the most patronizing and condescending

discussion of feminism I've ever read. It takes an anti-feminist man to explain to these feminists why their concerns are so trivial.

Not unexpected, but still, well done sir.

[Bonobo]

15. Thank you. I am honored.

You really bring out the best in me.

[geek tragedy]

17. Nah, this is all you and your profound insight

into how feminists are really a bunch of mentally unstable, overprivileged whiners.

When, we all know that men are the real victims of society, facing such burdens as seeing other men slapped in old movies.

[Bonobo]

23. I am glad to see that I am beginning to win you over.

But it isn't really all of you. Just the ones that see shadows around every corner -reasons to explain the thousand of micro-slights they feel each day.

As for slapping, I was surprised to see that you did not agree that allowing women to get away with physical violence is, itself, a form of condescension implying weakness -similar in that way to "benevolent sexism".

Maybe that wasn't covered by the professor though...

[geek tragedy]

27. I'm sure the feminists appreciate you telling them what

they are and aren't allowed to object to in good faith.

The people objecting to face slaps in movies were trying to peddle the "poor menz oppressed by the violent bullying womenz" meme, not to any kind of benevolent sexism (face slaps are so 1950's anyways).

Might have been a relevant argument during the Eisenhower administration.

[kdmorris]

175. Please stop using "the feminists" as if we are all some monolithic entity

We all have brains and can think for ourselves (and can make our own arguments, thank you very much) - and as you know, we can disagree with one another. Please do not be so condescending as to use us as a weapon to make your argument.

We aren't a tool for you to pull out and use at your whim when it suits you.

[geek tragedy]

178. Very well, "these feminists" will work as an errata? Nt

[ismnotwasm]

32. Not good form

Bonobo. You can hand out better snark than that. Definitely grumpy, and dare I say it? A little bitter?

[Bonobo]

34. You're right, I think I'm slipping in the snark department.

Bitter? Not really. More like annoyed... like when I burn my toast... that kind of feeling.

[ismnotwasm]

38. No, definitely bitter

And far too grumpy. I'd hate to think what happens when you drop the toast jam and butter side down.

[Bonobo]

42. I dropped a whole pan full of Japanese white "leeks" tonight

I was so mad! All over the floor. I have to admit I applied the 5 second rule generously.

[ismnotwasm]

44. Ew

No harm was caused to anyone I hope?

[Bonobo]

50. My son found 2 carpet threads. I was shamed but stopped short of seppuku.

I cooked lunch and dinner tonight in addition to a long PTA meeting.

Dads get tired too.

[ismnotwasm]

54. Yes Dads certainly do

Now, feeling a bit sensitive are we?

[Bonobo]

58. Yeah, surprisingly men have the whole gamut of emotions at our disposal as well. nt

[ismnotwasm]

61. Well try being less adversarial

Why would you think I'm unaware of men's emotions, or rather that its all surprising that they have them? I have a lovely husband of 20 years. We love each other very much.

[Bonobo]

67. I also had my 20th anniversary this year

I have been side by side with my wife, working at home and cooking,cleaning and being together with the family that whole time.
I see conflict resolution in a very different way than many do who see me as something other than what I am.
But I always, always hit back when I feel an attack. Until then, I am quite the sweetie.
I have learned that it is an immutable part of my nature.

[geek tragedy]

71. Your first post in this thread was an attack on feminists

as overprivileged, emotionally unstable whiners.

Not to mention how you trolled the feminists in a discussion regarding pregnancy earlier today.

Pretending to be a victim is not an endearing quality.

[Bonobo]

82. Perhaps you are blind to your own lack of endearing qualities...

My first post, if read carefully, was a strongly worded opinion on the possible reason behind the existence of some overly represented extremists in the feminist camp.

I went on to say that I am in agreement with the goals of equality but when I see silliness that seems motivated by issues other than that goal, I will always call it out, particularly when invited by the op to do so.

[geek tragedy]

100. Yes, your personal attack on feminists who say stuff that makes you as a man

uncomfortable was totally and clearly just a rational man explaining why those silly overemotional women weren't doing feminism right.

[Bonobo]

105. I find myself, unsurprisingly,...

NOT cut to the quick by your exhaustingly predictable and deliciously ironic White Knight behavior.

[geek tragedy]

110. "white knight" ah, the term of derision used by anti-feminist men to describe

men who are allies of feminists.

Because no man could really agree with the feminists without having his own angle, etc etc etc.

It could be a valid critique, had I not the opportunity to watch the feminists on this board pwn Team MRA on a regular basis. They certainly don't need my help.

The reality is that I find anti-feminist men lacking, as men.

[Bonobo]

115. And the reality is that I find you to be a hypocrite

You display precisely the type of behavior you decry, to whit the coddling and condescension towards women.

As for lacking in what I consider a man, I assure you that I feel precisely the same towards you.

However I am not an anti-feminist -though I can see why you would need to construct a reality in which I am one.

[geek tragedy]

127. Yeah, your constant whining about feminists and posting anti-feminist rants

from MRAs and anti-woman blogs and how hard it is to be a man in the Men vs Feminism group is total proof of how you're a big cheerleader for feminism.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11144910

I think one of the main reasons that women and teenage girls engage in slut shaming is because they have been brainwashed to think that their private parts are golden treasures to be protected and the currency by which they engage in many forms of social negotiations.

Of course, this kind of behavior has its roots in many other primate species, such as chimps, in which sexual favors are traded for food. But what is the psychology behind slut-shaming in this context.

Could it be merely a competitive thing, in which women that are prone to acting sexual are main competitors for resources?

Yeah, you feminist you.

[seabeyond]

157. confused. raising hand here. white knight bad when allied with feminist. good when pulling out chair

holding door open, or off the ship first, ergo benevolent sexism reinforcing sexism.

did i get that right?

isnt that fuckin funny.

fight sexism, and white knight bad

reinforce sexism, and white knight a HERO

[geek tragedy]

158. Allow me to translate:

White Knight (benevolent sexism type): Nice guy, gentleman, manners, gallant, chivalrous.

White Knight (anti-sexist type): Pink poodle, mangina, gender traitor, feminist toady, etc.

[seabeyond]

161. wow. just wow. shit like this, the so obvious in your face crap that people pretend they do not see.

i generally have to run it by my very perceptive oldest son to get his view so he can tell me how someone can lie to themselves so well, cause i do not get it. funny

[ismnotwasm]

81. So what's your deal with feminists then?

I'm aware of you, but I kind of stay away. You seem to either to enjoy stirring things up, or misinterpreting what is said, or at least putting it in the worst possible light. You appear to be quite intelligent, just hostile.

[Bonobo]

86. I get annoyed by the American style of dualistic thinking

In reality, I applaud strong woman who do their thing whatever it may be. I happily support all people's rights to have equal access to all the things that can make them fulfilled and satisfied.

I reject stereotypes for either gender and I feel that some of the things posted here in the name of feminism are another aspect of a kind of dualistic control behavior whereby people try to coerce others into behaviors of their choosing --quite the opposite of the tolerant behavior that I myself would prefer.

When that happens, I "hulk" out and my aggressive ny Jewish side overcomes my later-acquired Japanese zen thing.

In other words, extremist talk gets on my last nerve.

[ismnotwasm]

106. I haven't seen too much what I consider extremist.

I understand there was a anti-trans poster who was banned when I was taking a little break from DU, who may have been a separatist. That's is an extreme-- and vile view to me. I read rad-fem blogs all the time. DU, feminist wise, is pretty tame.

Gendered power dynamics, rape, domestic violence pay inequities, women in the sciences gap, none of those are 'extreme'

Opinions on like things like pornography-as-oppressor and male sexual entitlement, while bring out a lot of debate, are also not extreme. Just not agreed upon, and I see communication breaking down right at the point where I would think that entitlement is feeling threatened. Now that may or may not be the case, personally I'm much better discussing these things in person, and I do, often. It's very rewarding creating a dialogue instead of a snark fest, but that's a difficult thing to do once its starts.

[Bonobo]

111. You know what?

The sad reality of it is that I would bet my last dollar that we would be in complete agreement or near so if we discussed in person.

Frankly, I let my annoyance with the attitudes I righty or wrongly read into online posters personalities get away from me.

Perhaps I let myself get pushed into playing a dev's advocate role. As for extremism, I think it is not an extremism of ideas, but an extremism in terms of attitude.

An exaggerated example--let's say we are trying to exist men to pay a larger role in helping to anything they can to reduce rape... Well, we could say something like "Men, we would like you to help us spread the message" or you could choose to say "All men are potential rapists. Stop Raping, you men!" I exaggerate to make he point that yes, the medium IS the message.

[ismnotwasm]

131. From my point of view, and statistics I trust back me up

The majority of men are not rapists, they abhor rape, in fact I think part of how modern 'benevolent sexism' still exists arose from a feeling of helpless protectiveness in men---as well as a byproduct from days gone by. The larger ingrained rape culture promoted in media, the sexually entitled male is more problematic to discuss. Especially I think with ones like yourself who are married, have families, and want society to improve for your children, male and female.

Courtesy is never a bad thing no matter who is doing it. Condescending to women as the proverbial 'weaker' sex is.

I think feminists would like to see more active involvement involving men to stop sexual violence, and truth to tell, we are. There are a number of groups involving men or run by men, youth groups and such that are actively involved in stopping rape. It's a really cool thing to see and be a part of.

So, yes we probably are closer than we think.

[opiate69]

179. My, my, ism... reduced to using the dread "tone argument"?!?!

[nomorenomore08]

200. Why are you being so antagonistic to her? Is that really necessary?

ism being, quite often, one of the more reasonable posters on here.

[opiate69]

202. We have a history of butting heads.. tho I will agree she can be quite reasonable at times..

The "Tone argument" deflection is often employed by her ideological compatriots to justify their generally incivil and belligerent tactics. And I just love the smell of irony in the morning.

[nomorenomore08]

206. Fair enough. The "tone argument" is fairly pointless no matter who uses it.

nt

[LanternWaste]

113. I imagine many people do indeed write of fingers burned by toast...

"like when I burn my toast... "

Yet of enough import however, to write of that minor annoyance as a response. Although, I imagine many people do indeed write of fingers burned by toast... and are given all the credibility they are in fact, warranted.

[Bonobo]

117. I will wait for the English translation of that post. Nt

[NCTraveler]

92. "Just the ones that see shadows around every corner"

Not around every corner. More like in our face every day. Even here.

[HappyMe]

36. Here's the thing,

your last sentence there is just the sort of mean spirited sentiment that is close to making me change my vote to 'bash men'.
It's the kind of attitude not engineered to change anybody's mind. It is also the reason I am so turned off by these 'theories'.
It's that person's opinion, you don't agree. You did absolutely nothing to further your cause.

[boston bean]

39. I'm glad you have finally found a "reason" to

choose and option you, quite obviously, wanted to choose all along.

[HappyMe]

52. As I said, if I wanted that option

I would have picked it.

I quite obviously picked the option I thought best applies to the push poll you posted.

[boston bean]

121. Still, very happy for you, happy me!

[HappyMe]

124. Bless your heart.

[boston bean]

126. Yes, bless my beating heart. Happy me!!!!!!!!! nt

[ismnotwasm]

43. What you have liked better as an option?

I think BB is seeing a dichotomy in the attitude a towards feminism rather than a continuum, thus the phrasing of this poll.

[geek tragedy]

49. That poster is eager to dismiss the concerns

of feminists and smear them as emotionally unstable and deem any kind of feminist compaint as overprivileged whining.

He also posts stuff complaining about how rough men have it compared to women, his latest being the dreaded face-slap that he's seen in movies but never in real life, but is sure happens.

In short, he's a men's rights type who likes to troll feminists.

[redqueen]

60. Interesting. And the snark in the post he replied to was ... ? nt

[redqueen]

45. [phone]

[Sargasso Sea]

22. +1

[ismnotwasm]

26. From the one who dismissed

The opinion of an Australian Aboriginal woman of color on childbearing as 'pointless'

Grumpy today?

[Eleanors38]

56. "Precious." Here I thought the term a derogatory expression for my gun...

I've seen it float up so much in the Gungeons (yes, now there are 2!).

Mosy feminist theory and actual day-to-day practice which I have read & experienced seeks conditions where a woman has the freedom to choose how they live.

In the words of that great social critic and scholar Johnny Horton in his noted work "Hooray For That Little Difference:"

"We got preachers, gangsters and petty thiefs,
We got doctors, lawyers and Indian chiefs,
When we face the truth about the Human Plan,
There's very little difference 'tween a woman
and a man. But hooray! for that little difference!"

[HappyMe]

10. Pass.

Like anything with 'theories' or concepts, there is good and bad.

This poll is far too black and white.

[boston bean]

12. So that leads me to believe that you do feel that

some or something within feminist theory purpose is to bash and criticize men?

[HappyMe]

18. If I thought that I would have

voted for that option.

[ismnotwasm]

20. Just the usually equivocation

They'll get there.

[geek tragedy]

25. A lot of men are in favor of feminism so long as

feminism agitates for stuff they perceive to be in their interest.

So long as it's stuff that makes women more sexually available (contraception/abortion) or lessens the financial burden on them (making the workplace more accessible to women) then it's great.

But, oh lordy, if the feminists start saying stuff that makes them uncomfortable, then feminism becomes the province of man-hating, priviliged, shallow, whiny mentally unstable bitter women, as a men's rights dude so eloquently put it upthread.

[redqueen]

62. Yep!

It's funny how that works.

[polly7]

66. That sounds more like projection.

How do you speak for so many other men?

[geek tragedy]

70. It's observation.

Where a person stands is often driven by where they sit. Applies to gender relations as well as to economic policy.

Men are going to be hostile to any challenge by women to something that benefits them. Just like white people tend to get royally pissed off when black people start agitating for things that make white people uncomfortable or would make their lives less convenient (I don't own slaves, why should I be punished) etc.

Just like it's pretty easy for heterosexuals to support marriage equality--they lose NOTHING from it.

[polly7]

72. Ahh .... it sounded like you might actually have some convincing

examples of it, it was so nasty. Based on your reply, I'll still go with projection.

[geek tragedy]

80. If you want examples:

Lots of men here are totally 'feminists' when it comes to contraception and abortion.

But, if you dare speak out against pornography or prostitution as phenomena or practices that degrade women and work against gender equality, they freak out and throw terms around like "right wing" and "sex negative" and "radfems" as pejoratives against those arguing against porn and prostitution.

The Men's Group here is particularly full of outrage against anyone on the left who disapproves of porn.

[redqueen]

87. Yep. And it isn't that they disagree, it's the hair on fire freakouts.

If anyone criticizes porn, they seem to perceive the criticism as calls to BAN ALL TEH PRONS NAO!!!!! and go totally and completely apeshit with zealot-like defenses. If it wasn't so pathetic it'd be amusing.

[polly7]

93. Zealot like?

Can't think of anything more zealot-like or pathetic than stating men see women as potential *toilets.

But really, I haven't seen anything near what you've described by men here. I think you exaggerate.

[redqueen]

97. Wow, really? Still? Even after you were shown to be so disingenuous

about this little obsession of yours?

I guess I found a reason to wish we had access to archived meta threads.

But no, that wouldn't help so much, since you deleted your OP. Without posting the OP's contents in a reply. At least the many replies explaining context to you would be available, though.

Oh well. You enjoy yourself, now.

[polly7]

101. What are you talking about?

You're stating things that are supposedly said here that are really ugly, I stated something you've said and defended here. It wasn't in any OP of mine. Bad memory?

[redqueen]

103. Really? Really?!

Wow.

[polly7]

108. How strange.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2393422

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014113257

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1151658

[cyberswede]

154. Um...

Fucktoilet was coined by a radical feminist (IIRC), to describe the way far too many women are treated by far too many men in this rape culture we're in.

Pointing out that some men treat women as a ftoilet is not calling women ftoilets.

[pacalo]

181. The point for me is, why was this disgusting bit of trivia brought to DU...

by an outspoken, vocal feminist who is a member of the group whose mission is to rid DU of (what they deem as) offensive language; particularly those they consider "sexist" & "demeaning to women".

Why did anyone on DU need to know this information...

[polly7]

183. Thank you. I thought it was obvious.

It was brought here for shock value and nothing more. It was disgusting. Many of us said so, we were insulted and laughed at for being offended.

I can't even imagine thinking of a woman in such a filthy way.

[pacalo]

187. And to heighten the flames of the torches & sharpen the pitchforks.

It was spelled out by someone who was in on the warpath against everyone else's language that didn't get their approval.

If that term had been used by anyone else as a "teaching moment" , that group of feminists would have hit the alert button faster than a NY minute.

[geek tragedy]

99. LaPierresque. nt

[ismnotwasm]

75. That is a misinterpretation of projection.

FYI

[pacalo]

184. Phrases like "you little man" & "you men" certainly contribute to the men-are-the-enemy perception.

[The Straight Story]

30. There is a difference between the goal and the method (nt)

[Raine1967]

135. This, I agree. nt

[boston bean]

136. It's just what people use to say about

civil rights activists. Or LGBT activists. And suffragettes. And so on and so on and so on... throughout history of those who won significant battles and rights all over the world.

[Raine1967]

156. Perhaps you meant to tell that to the person I agreed with.

I don't need you to to lecture me about history. I really don't.


So do me a favor, back off.

Thank you.

[boston bean]

165. I was lecturing? A couple of short sentences is lecturing?

Ok, whatever floats your boat.

It was meant for you both, just so you know. Yes, you were meant to receive the post.

[Raine1967]

168. Please don't feign ignorance.

You and I are both smarter than that.

I do understand that you speak out against the patriarchy, but the opposite shouldn't be some bizarre form of matriarchy from a small and vocal group of women on DU who decide to go after other women that might disagree with the way they deliver the message. There are places I choose not to post on DU -- you response to me is exactly why I don't post in some groups.

Yes, the way the message is delivered by a few on DU is a problem for myself. Yes, you lectured me. You chose to come after me for agreeing with someone else that I suspect you don't agree with. You came after me. Had I chosen to respond to you directly here in this thread, I would have. I didn't.

I suspect you might not like reading these words, but they are mine. There is a lot of talk about patriarchy in society on DU -- in the recent past said patriarchy has been directed at the members of DU. That is where I take issue.

I believe patriarchy should be discussed. That said, there are ways to deliver the message that might not alienate people, especially here on this board, and especially here in GD. Sometimes I think the sexism is just as bad as some matriarchy I see here. Women who deem to speak on behalf of all women on DU -- they are the ones who refuse to accept that perhaps people might not agree with the MESSAGE DELIVERY.

I suspect I shall be further reprimanded and scolded -- and given snark or whatever idiotic method of shaming for not agreeing with your presentation. So be it.

[boston bean]

169. You are alienating me with your post.

making all sorts of false accusations.

[Raine1967]

171. I think you will be just fine.

Only you can alienate yourself. I am only speaking my mind and stating my opinion. My opinion on a message board that happens to be filled with opinions.

The only accusation I see is that I accused us both of being smart.

I believe we are.

[boston bean]

173. I am fine and don't need you to tell me whether I am or not.

But if you continue to tell me I am alienating you by my posts on certain subject, i suggest you get over it.

it's a discussion board, and I'm not going to stop writing what I please as long as it is within the bounds of what is acceptable on DU.

I don't really care if you feel I alienate you or anyone else. I speak for me. And some like what I say and some don't. Count yourself in the latter category, I don't care.

As you say, one can only make oneself feel alienated, right?

[Raine1967]

174. I never said you needed anything.

I never spoke of need.

I never suggested you stop writing. I also never asked you to care about my opinion. What I Did say is that I am going to post my opinion on DU. How you managed to twist this around is baffling.

Also, I didn't use the word alienate -- or any form of it. That was you. I'm going to ask that you don't apply to me something you yourself said. That is dishonest.

Try not to misinterpret the things I say. Own your words, Boston Bean. I never said what you seem to think I did. Here is what I wrote:

Please don't feign ignorance.

You and I are both smarter than that.

I do understand that you speak out against the patriarchy, but the opposite shouldn't be some bizarre form of matriarchy from a small and vocal group of women on DU who decide to go after other women that might disagree with the way they deliver the message. There are places I choose not to post on DU -- you response to me is exactly why I don't post in some groups.

Yes, the way the message is delivered by a few on DU is a problem for myself. Yes, you lectured me. You chose to come after me for agreeing with someone else that I suspect you don't agree with. You came after me. Had I chosen to respond to you directly here in this thread, I would have. I didn't.

I suspect you might not like reading these words, but they are mine. There is a lot of talk about patriarchy in society on DU -- in the recent past said patriarchy has been directed at the members of DU. That is where I take issue.

I believe patriarchy should be discussed. That said, there are ways to deliver the message that might not alienate people, especially here on this board, and especially here in GD. Sometimes I think the sexism is just as bad as some matriarchy I see here. Women who deem to speak on behalf of all women on DU -- they are the ones who refuse to accept that perhaps people might not agree with the MESSAGE DELIVERY.

I suspect I shall be further reprimanded and scolded -- and given snark or whatever idiotic method of shaming for not agreeing with your presentation. So be it.

And here is your response:

You are alienating me with your post.

making all sorts of false accusations.

So, I have to ask, how did you come up with this response?

You aren't looking for legitimate discussion with you OP, I suspect. I think at this point, you might be looking to fight with people who may disagree with your approach.

Or, as I said: Message Delivery.

There can be no delivery if people twist words of fellow members of DU. At a certain point, twisting words to fit a dynamic hurts legitimacy of a cause -- in my opinion.

I'm not alienating you. I'm simply trying to tell you how I feel. You don't have to agree, I respect that, but don't try to say I said something that I didn't say. I own what I write here on DU the same way I own my actions and words in the world.

[boston bean]

177. Let's see

but the opposite shouldn't be some bizarre form of matriarchy from a small and vocal group of women on DU who decide to go after other women that might disagree with the way they deliver the message.

Point to where I've ever advocated for the opposite of a patriarchy, ie some bizarre form of the matriarchy.

Yes, the way the message is delivered by a few on DU is a problem for myself. Yes, you lectured me. You chose to come after me for agreeing with someone else that I suspect you don't agree with.

I don't know where you get my voicing my opinion is coming after you. False accusation, I wasn't coming after you.

I believe patriarchy should be discussed. That said, there are ways to deliver the message that might not alienate people, especially here on this board, and especially here in GD. Sometimes I think the sexism is just as bad as some matriarchy I see here. Women who deem to speak on behalf of all women on DU -- they are the ones who refuse to accept that perhaps people might not agree with the MESSAGE DELIVERY.

And that was something you just made up in your mind. I do not advocate for a matriarchy.

You said I was alienating, I say everything you said was quite alienating as well, since it holds no basis in truth or fact. Just your way of seeing things, which you are more than welcome to do. But don't expect me to not answer it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

203. All I will say is....this discussion

Is very familiar in the pattern it's taken.

Oy.

[99Forever]

37. The bashing ...

... comes from the militant, angry people using the theory to beat men over the head with, not the theory itself. Nice try at deflection tho.

[Bonobo]

40. This whole thread will be bashing anyone that dares to respond

in a way that is ANYTHING less than complete agreement with the OP.

That is its purpose.

[99Forever]

47. Of course it will.

That is the pattern. There is an contingent of very angry, militant, men hating/bashing people here that swarm anyone and everyone that doesn't knuckle under to their intimidation. They have a VERY negative affect on the very causes they claim to champion.

[ismnotwasm]

90. No I don't

First, I rarely 'swarm', second, DU can't really piss me off since you're all invisible little people to me, so the anger--nah. Third DU has almost nothing to do with, and indeed little interest in or knowledge of, actual feminist activity; it's a discussion board.

What I think you mean is that the feminists here are like the rest of DU when it comes to a cause or opinion they feel strongly about.

You don't really feel intimidated do you?

[oldhippie]

182. +1 Well said. nt

nt

[pintobean]

48. My vote is every bit as serious as the poll itself

Not at all.
Since the pass option doesn't make a strong enough statement about the poll, I took the ridiculous option.

[boston bean]

84. For the record, it was quite serious.

[boston bean]

41. So, it's not the theory, it's those that put it into practice?

If it just sat their on a shelf and no one ever tried to apply it to real world situations from whence it came, there would be no problemo?

okaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyy....

[99Forever]

53. Asked and answered.

Not that that will stop you from tossing out chum.

Proceed.

[boston bean]

57. Yep, it was asked and it was answered.

Twice now. Thanks.

[redqueen]

64. Why do you use the word "militant"? nt

[99Forever]

68. Perhaps...

... that would be a very good question to ask yourself.

[redqueen]

74. No, I'm not the one using it.

The term would fit so many other people here, who argue forcefully about any number of issues, yet I've only ever seen a handful of people use it here, usually to demonize feminists.

The anti-feminists on the right are quite fond of using it to demonize feminists as well as activists for other progressive causes. It's just ... odd ... seeing progressives use it against feminists right along with people like Rush Limbaugh and Pat Robertson.

[99Forever]

79. "Physician heal thyself."

You get what you give.

[boston bean]

85. Rush would have said the same thing to Sandra Fluke.

[99Forever]

89. Would he?

Couldn't say as to that. I NEVER listen to that asshole. Apparently you do.

[boston bean]

91. From what I read on DU about the incident, I'm sure it's so. nt

[99Forever]

95. Well alrighty then.

You assume to speak for someone you don't actually know, on subjects you haven't discussed with them, because of what someone else that you don't actually know has posted on the internet about them. That about sum it up?

[boston bean]

98. I speak for myself. Thanks for trying to give me more power, but I reject it just the same.

Thank you.

[99Forever]

104. Really?

Then why are you telling me what "Rush Limbaugh" would say and equating me with him? Make up your mind.

Just what is your problem?

[boston bean]

107. Rush Limbaugh says it all the time. Militant, feminazi's etc

I don't have to leave DU to learn that, or read about it.

[99Forever]

114. As I said above.

Don't know what that asshole says, don't care what that asshole says. He, much like some other people, are completely irrelevant and a total waste of time and energy to bother with. If someone else chooses to run around all butthurt over the crap that spews from that asshole, that is their free choice to do so.

But when the same someone CHOOSES to equate me with that asshole, they are crossing a line.

And so, you make the jump to my Ignore List. And just every other person who has earned that place of honor, you will HAVE to respond to this some snarky or insulting comment. To me, it will simply read: "You are ignoring this member." Enjoy.

[boston bean]

116. I told you what he says. so now you know.

I wasn't speaking for him or you. I was giving you information.

[HappyMe]

118. It's part of the 'shaming', I believe.

You get called Rush, La Pierre, not progressive.... whatever, to anger you and sign on their dotted line.

[boston bean]

120. Saying feminists are militant is something rush limbaugh says.

No shaming, just a point to the fact of the matter.

I really don't appreciate having right wing, rush limbaugh women hating phrases used to describe feminists on DU.

Yet you take the offense to when someone points it out. LOL

[HappyMe]

123. LOL!!

I took no offense. Just pointing out to another poster the 'method' here.

[boston bean]

125. What method? Pointing out that someone is saying

something and using the same language in the same way Rush Limbaugh uses it, is a method to what?

[snooper2]

163. do you know who Cathy Brennan is?

[boston bean]

164. No I don't. nt

[one_voice]

185. I agree with you...

I would consider it shaming as well. Taking the worst possible scenario and inferring that someone is like that/them is to ME shaming. I wonder if the shoe was on the other foot if it would cause pain and complaint.

[boston bean]

209. You couldn't possibly apply that to

others, could you. Because that's exactly what I feel is done to feminists.

[one_voice]

210. I'm not sure I understand what you're..

asking.

You couldn't possibly apply that to
others, could you.

I think I was pretty clear. I'm not making any exceptions to what I said. Of course it's applicable to EVERYONE; not just feminist.

I would consider it shaming as well. Taking the worst possible scenario and inferring that someone is like that/them is to ME shaming.

The world does not revolve around feminists, we are not the only ones that can be shamed.

[JustAnotherGen]

51. Social Justice

I opted for neither because too often we overlook the Social Justice aspects of feminism.

[boston bean]

55. And if social justice was achieved, what would we have?

But I understand what you are saying.

[JustAnotherGen]

151. Depends on how you look at it

In my world - wrongs would be righted - and Sojourner Truth's words would be a rallying cry to FIRST draw black women into the 'fold' of the 'weaker sex' - THEN we ALL lift up and say, "Ain't I a woman" together.

Oh - and we'll all also have a lot of money to go celebrate because we'll be making what we are worth -not just pennies on the dollar!

[ismnotwasm]

109. And that is a very, very good point

Women are the original 'other'. Social injustice stems from devaluing human beings, allowing them to become a little 'less' human.

[JustAnotherGen]

152. John Stuart Mill's

Work has influenced me in this life - read his essay - On The Subjugation of Women. That was a man . . . who got 'it'.

[LittleBlue]

59. Lots of theories in feminism

The vast majority of feminists seem focused on equality and fairness. A minority seem all over the place: microaggressions, trans bashing, sex negative theory, etc.

I believe the true purpose of feminist theory is about equality. From what I've seen, a small number use the movement as an "ism" to legitimize their anger against certain groups: men, trans, and women who make choices they don't agree with.

[Whisp]

63. This argument sort of reminds me of the gun nuttery of the extremes.

o noes, they are going to take away ALL our gunzz!

to

o noes, they are going to take away ALL our pornzz!!

when neither is true.

I think this is the very basic reason some men here panic in feminism discussions.

[HereSince1628]

65. I think theories on feminism provide perspectives/points of view

which are usually heuristic. In building points of view, the theories go on to create names for features of the social landscape at which they are aimed. Collectively point of view, and a lexicon to describe it, can be applied to the authoring of narratives intended to recruit others to the pursuit of understanding and to social change.

The calls for social change contribute to a large body of rather similar "liberation narratives" told by many groups around the world, be they groups identified by race, gender, religion, birth status etc.

The unity of the voice of liberation suggests the potential existence of a larger more general liberation theory and some feminist theory would have membership therein.

Typically liberation theory names some force(s) as the agency of oppression.

The agent of oppression in feminist theory has been called "the patriarchy", which is simultaneously the ideas that direct oppressive practices (as cultural expectations for female genital mutilation), and the organized social structures that sustain the oppression (as exemplified in power sturctures dominated by men in many religious denominations within the Abrahamic tradition).

While a sophomoric superficial view may see the feminist liberation narrative as a 'bashing' of men, it's probably more accurate to say that it is a naming of the oppression of women and the agencies whose acts direct and sustain that oppression.

[ismnotwasm]

73. That's why the 'One Billion Rising'

Movement is so powerful to me. It expresses a broader, worldview picture of the oppression of women that often differs from the viewpoint of an entitled, white first world feminist. These viewpoints desperately need to be heard and acknowledged and feminism is the organizational structure most often in involved in allowing these viewpoints to be heard, to be acknowledged, and an action plan for change started, WITH the active involvement of cultures from around the world.

[boston bean]

78. I think you make really good points.

Thanks for posting.

[smirkymonkey]

155. +10,000

[Nye Bevan]

69. The purpose of the movement is to further women's equality.

But I do get the impression that there are some here who enjoy bashing men. Or who enjoy shit-stirring, and bash men to achieve this end.

As an example, there was a thread a couple of months ago that discussed the fear of rape that all women have. As a father of daughters and as a husband I completely sympathize with this issue and posted accordingly. The makings of a productive thread. But then of course someone went over the top and posted that "all men benefit from rape". An offensive and ridiculous statement, especially to someone who worries about his wife and daughters. Many other DUers objected to this statement but plenty of DUers doubled down on it and the thread was pretty much derailed. Almost as though certain DUers did not like the idea of an anti-rape thread where male and female DUers were generally in agreement, and were determined to stir the shit.

http://sync.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2154087

[boston bean]

76. I think you missed the point.

The point of the quote you link to, was in a reference that the fear of rape in society does keep women from public spaces, keeps them in fear, and keeps them in their place.

Was it a strong statement, yes. But it there is some truth to it when you look to the culture we live in.

If you can't understand the what the culture of rape means to women, and you get so personally offended by the very thought was dared to be said, I'm not sure what to say to you in response.

One would think you could show some empathy for what it means to women and how it effects our daily lives, not making it better, but restricting us a full human beings, even though every man does not rape.

[Nye Bevan]

94. I agree that rape causes women to live in fear and I hate that,

for itself, and as a husband and a father.

But posting that "all men benefit from rape" is obviously going to stir the shit. And boy, did it.

Beyond that, this is not the correct thread to rehash this issue so I will not do so further. It was simply an example of needlessly provocative shit-stirring.

[boston bean]

102. It was a response to the fact of what women face

and something most men don't have to.

[LeftyMom]

77. I see two misogynist trolls outed themselves.

Nobody ever said woman haters were smart, but damn.

[KamaAina]

96. Maybe they don't know we can click to see their names.

[pintobean]

170. I'm aware

I explained my vote above

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022528244#post48

I think the results of the poll and the number of passes make my point. This is the worst poll I've seen here. That says a lot.

[whatchamacallit]

83. Don't really give a shit

My belief in, and support of, women's equality has been consistent my entire life. Frankly, I regard women to be superior to men in most ways that really matter (maybe that makes me an uber benevolent sexist). I don't believe women need my protection or patronage. The woman I work for is the boss because of her talent and qualifications. Despite my beliefs and behaviors, the angry, confrontational tone of many of these threads put a knot in my stomach.

[talkingmime]

88. "A man of quality is not threatened by a woman seeking equality."

- Bumper sticker on my van. I'm a guy.

[ismnotwasm]

112. Nice!

And thank you

[talkingmime]

119. If anything, females are the superior gender. I'm just a guy.

[The2ndWheel]

128. That's some multi-layered sexism right there

Invertedly reversed sexism. Or something like that. Women as the superior gender because they're women? That means women don't even have to try. That would be privilege by nothing but birth. That's everything that is fought against. You've turned everything on its head.

[talkingmime]

130. Okay. I'm confused. I just think women are superior. Normally men think they are.

Can you expound upon that? This is a male dominated society that STILL subjugates women. On average, women earn 76% of what men do for the same job. Why the hell do we still have a tiered society based on gender? I have a wife and three daughters. I care about this matter rather deeply. To say I feel women are superior isn't sexist, reverse sexist, or anything else. It's just been my experience that it is the superior gender. As a male I can confidently say that most men are assholes. But from a social perspective, all should be equal. Same with race and religion, but those are different discussions.

[The2ndWheel]

141. Superior doesn't equal equal right?

Especially if they're superior because they're women. Certainly not because most men may be assholes. From the recent talk around here, that's benevolent sexism. I think. From what I gather, women can't be something, good or bad, just because they're women. You can't do something for a woman, just because she's a woman.

For example, if you're on a date with a woman, should the man pay for dinner simply because he's a man? You wouldn't assume that responsibility if you're out with a buddy. Is it sexist to pay for dinner because your date is a woman? Should it be 50/50? Should it depend on who asks who out?

[talkingmime]

144. Our rule on dinner was always "who has any money?"

Same with bar tabs. If you're holding, you get to pay - YAAAAAHHHHH!!! Pass the hat and see who has some green. That's seriously gender neutral! "We had HOW MANY BEERS?"

"Andy's puking in the urinal."

"Well go get his wallet!"

Besides, in same sex relationships, how do you handle that by tradition? One of our regular house guests brought her girlfriend over a month or so ago and they were totally comfortable here. She can't even take her girlfriend to her own PARENTS' house!

And hey, I know I'm an asshole. At least I don't try to pretend otherwise. But then again, if I was a woman, I'd probably say men were the superior gender. I wouldn't be the prime example of a specimine in either gender. Like I said, I'm an asshole. But unlike most assholes, I know it and admit it. What gives me hope is that I've know a HELL of a lot of bigger assholes who DO NOT know it or admit it. So maybe I'm not all that bad afterall. Hard to tell.

[lumberjack_jeff]

143. If women are superior, and comparatively precious, then we're doing all the wrong things.

The society we had in 1900 is exactly the correct society for that worldview.

Men are expendable in defense of the women and responsible for their wellbeing. Being responsible for her wellbeing requires having authority over her conduct.

We're trying to back our way into equality while preserving chivalry. We refuse to examine the overriding principle.

[talkingmime]

146. Well, I'll go with the responsibility thing, but not the authority thing.

Men have been historically expendable because women carry the next generation. I'm not sure that means much anymore (if anything), but it certainly did in times past. The tradition survived, and the "chivalry" behind it. I'd gladly sacrifice myself for my wife or daughters. No thought would be necessary. Perhaps that's chivalry or perhaps it is simple love. I don't know and don't care. I'd just do it. Frankly, I'd do it for any random child in harms way. I've lived a good life. It has to end at some point. A child has a whole life ahead of him or her and deserves to live it.

Yeah, yeah, I know. I'm a softy.

[lumberjack_jeff]

147. You can't have one without the other.

You can't be responsible for an outcome without having some agency over the conditions.

[talkingmime]

148. Why not? My wife rules the nest but I'd lay down my life for her.

On the other hand, she can kick the shit out of damn near anyone, but that's beside the point. I don't dominate her and she doesn't dominate me. We're best friends and work together on everything. We both feel responsible for each other and neither of us attempts to impose authority over the other. Maybe it's weird, but we treat each other as equals. Is it weird? I don't get out much.

[lumberjack_jeff]

149. You're conflating the culture with your household.

How you feel about your wife is immaterial to the point of the op.

Being inferior, should you lay your life on the line for every woman or just your family?

[talkingmime]

150. I honestly can't say about every woman, but probably. Certainly any child.

I don't know why, but it's built into me. Yes, probably any woman. All I know for certain is I wouldn't even think before protecting a child. I think all adults should have that instinct. And it's not just women either. I'd probably protect anyone, male or female. If we can't protect each other, why are we pack animals?

[lumberjack_jeff]

159. We're not talking about children. We're talking about women. They are different things.

Rather than lay down your life for women, why not take away the factors in their lives which create risk? Your life is a gift that only gives once. Your ability to judge whether they should board the airplane or obtain a drivers license would save many more lives, would it not?

[talkingmime]

162. I don't think that way. My life is a throw away. I've lived it.

[YoungDemCA]

211. "Men are expendable in defense of the women" No....

Men are expendable in defense of the power elite of our society-a power elite that has molded the world in its own image as the power elite (as they are, by and large, a group of straight, white men).

Also, you brought up the year 1900. Well, as much progress as has been made for women since then, our society still has a long way to go in oh so many ways for there to be real social equality.

As for the many things you dislike being "responsible" for as a man-it's not women who have defined those gender roles. The thing about the patriarchy is that men don't just define roles for women; they define roles for other men, too.

[lumberjack_jeff]

212. The person I'm responding to is a man.

He's of the opinion that he's expendable because he's a man and thus inferior. In my experience, this sentiment is common.

I'm not calling out women for what he's saying. But I do think it's worth noting that I'm the only one who apparently objects to this form of sexism.

The thing about the patriarchy is that men don't just define roles for women; they define roles for other men, too.

True enough. And silence is consent.

[ismnotwasm]

134. Someone just posted a George Carlin video saying something similar

From "it's Bad For You" actually what he said was the men are stupid and women are crazy and women are crazy because men are stupid--


Trust me its sound a whole hell of a lot better in his skit, and as usual he expounds n his theme. Probably still up in the video section if you haven't seen it.

[Comrade Grumpy]

122. I hear there are some anti-abortion bills progressing in the states.

Maybe when we get done with this, we can worry about that.

[Zorra]

129. Nah, it's just a bunch of smartass uppity wimmens who don't know their place.

hopefully obvious

[geek tragedy]

132. Sarcasm tag necessary.,

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2528305

[Zorra]

137. Yep, now, them wimmens is really gettin' out of hand. Best to take 'em

out to the woodshed and teach 'em their place with the ol' willow switch before this liberation crap starts ta spreadin'.

Next thing you know, our wimmenfolk will start goin' ta college, wearin' pants, and stop ridin' horses sidesaddle.

[boston bean]

138. It's changed to the "method" now. We are down to the methods used.

LOL

[Zorra]

139. I see.

Well then, it appears that our little conspiracy has been uncovered.

Project XX/♀ must be initiated at once!

[seabeyond]

166. lol

you seem to be having TOO much fun. lol.

thanks for the giggles.

[Recursion]

140. I think the purpose of feminist "theory" is to create a mental model for understanding things

There are as many purposes of feminist practice as there are practitioners of feminism.

[nomorenomore08]

204. "There are as many purposes of feminist practice as there are practitioners of feminism." Good point

For the record I did answer "women's equality" as that's how I see feminism in general. But we are talking about a very wide-ranging, nuanced subject.

[lumberjack_jeff]

142. I think it's worth making the distinction between feminist theory and its practical application. n/t

[Rex]

145. I find the terms 'bash' and 'criticize' to mean two different things.

I think it all depends on how a person uses feminist theory or defines it. I think the purpose of feminism is to right the wrongs of inequality between men and women. In all aspects of life, not just the workforce.

[Deep13]

153. To explain historic gender relations and to deconstruct assumptions about those relations. nt

[Zorra]

160. Nice! Beautiful in its essential succinctness.

That, IMO, is definitely a primary component, if not the essential component, of the purpose of feminist theory.

I might add something like, "generally used as a basis for actions engaged in for maintaining and achieving greater equality among human beings, particularly women", but I believe you can do a better job of expressing express this than i can.

[seabeyond]

167. to deconstruct assumptions about those relations.

say it again and again.

you know, it was this weekend that i heard deconstruct. it is what we do. repeatedly. over and over and over. but, deconstruct, such a simple word in explanation.

thanks

[HiPointDem]

172. none of the above

[cthulu2016]

180. Neither. It is to provide employment for academics.

The purpose of feminism, however, is to advance the status of women.

One should never confuse feminist theory and feminism. The typical theoretic agitator cares nothing for the well-being of women except on his or her own exquisitely neurotic terms.

[MattBaggins]

189. Do you feel the same about professors of black studies and LGBT issues

or just women's studies professors?

[cherokeeprogressive]

186. I am certain that its purpose is NOT to bash and/or criticize men...

But it seems to be used that way quite often.

[pacalo]

188. If the purpose of your feminist "theory" is to further equality for women,

you've sadly failed in the execution. Instead of focusing on the issues that affect all DUers -- both women & husbands/daughters' fathers -- that could bring us together, the focus of your mission was to put all DUers outside of your group under a magnified lens for language that didn't meet your approval. Clearly, the alienation "theory" has not worked out for your group in gaining further equality for women.

[MattBaggins]

190. Perhaps all those problems you saw

are problems you wanted to find?

[pacalo]

192. Oh, yes!1! It certainly wasn't very *obvious*, was it, Matt?

[MattBaggins]

193. No the vile attacks against women who dare suggest

they have even the slightest concern with traditional gender norms was obvious.

[pacalo]

194. If only they had presented themselves as having an affable "concern"...

instead of creating havoc with constant accusations & PPR demands. That's not showing "concern with traditional gender norms" -- it was all about "my way or the highway" control.

[MattBaggins]

195. I didn't see that.

Sorry but I saw the usual bunch of suspects who go crazy on most every women's issue.

[pacalo]

196. "The usual bunch of suspects" who wouldn't stand by silently as that group

rode roughshod over DU to cause friction. The "usual bunch of suspects" who wanted to distance themselves from their behavior & tactics.

[MattBaggins]

197. If that's how you perceive it

carry on

[pacalo]

198. Thank you, Sir Matt!1!

[quinnox]

191. I don't like to vote in push polls

So no vote from me. I'm not surprised at how there are so many "passes".

[pacalo]

199. I gave it the consideration it deserves.

No selection at all.

[Warpy]

201. I'm not the type for elegantly stated theories and mission statements.

I define feminism as the shocking proposition that women are human beings.

Everything else, from reproductive control to getting paid fairly for our work, flows from that proposition.

[nadinbrzezinski]

205. Another pass

[Zoeisright]

207. Any "man" who feels upset by feminist theory

isn't much of a man.

[Warren DeMontague]

208. Which Feminism? Which Theory?

I guess I go by the old standby of Feminism as the fight for equal rights regardless of gender, and also the "radical notion that women are people", along with unapologetic fighting for reproductive freedom, equal pay, fairness, and equality in the workplace, along with accommodations for things like breastfeeding, and the absolute unswerving commitment to the freedom and agency of women in modern society to make their own damn decisions about their own damn lives and bodies.

By that yardstick, I would vote for "further equality". But surely you're aware that there are divisions within "Feminism". So I'm wondering which yardstick you're using for this poll.

[lumberjack_jeff]

213. Feminist theory as used in 2013 is not "the old standby" you are operating under.

Q) Do you support the ERA?
A) Heck yeah!
Q) do you support VAWA?
A) Heck yeah!
Q) The ERA says "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged... on account of sex."
A) Yay!
Q) Does the VAWA abridge equality of rights under the law on account of sex?
A) Heck no! It's not sexist, it only punishes men.

Feminism is about advocacy. It is not about equality except in the sense of "equality for me, by my definitions"