Step One: Chose a definition or model of feminism

[cthulu2016]

Step Two: Proclaim the ignorance of everyone who has not made the same specific and optional choices of definition.

This phenomenon is tiresome.

Some feminist thought is wrong.

Did that sound controversial to you? Why? Some of everything is wrong.

A lot of feminists have bitterly disagreed with each other, so obviously somebody was wrong sometimes.

And if we define "feminism" as defined as intrinsically good and correct then we have created a religion, not a way of thinking.

Nobody owns the word feminism. There is wonderful feminist thought and lousy feminist thought, which should be a clue that there is no narrowly defined thing called feminism.

Feminism is broader and more diverse than socialism, and socialism is a huge area of thought.

There is a logical break-down in this syllogism:

I consider myself a feminist
I think X
All feminists think X

So it might be better for a person to say "What I think..." rather than, "What feminists think..."





This stuff is OLD.

We all know Communists who insist that communism is good and that we cannot look to any negative examples because no nation has ever been communist.

And there is a point there. It is probably right, that no nation has ever been communist.

But every real-world governing system that has claimed that label for itself sucked.

So at some point, complaining that the evils of communism are definitional problems gets wearisome because not everybody can be expected to have the same understanding of the one-true-communism.

And even if one studied on that particular one-true-communism, the next communist they meet will probably be outraged to be associated with parts of that version.

Nobody who thinks that is a REAL communist!!!


And so on.

[quinnox]

1. yep, good point. Also, I think many are just tired of the whole topic at this point

That is the problem with pet issues, when someone is very focused on a pet issue, they can't comprehend that others may not put the same importance on their issue, and in fact, some others may have many other issues on a higher priority level than the one issue that the other person is so obsessed about.

So, typically, they take it as a *big insult* if you say that you don't care about that issue like they do, and start calling names and so on, not understanding that everyone has their own "pet issues", and they don't have to match either.

[seaglass]

26. It would be a good reflection of lack of interest if those who feel this way would not participate

in threads related to the topic. It's not necessary to post in the thread to say Trash or I'm not interested or post recipes - just don't post in the thread.

I do not get it. It is very very easy to avoid posting in threads. Just don't do it. If enough people don't post in threads they aren't interested in, the threads will drop. Have you not noticed this phenomenon before?

[redqueen]

37. +1

[geek tragedy]

2. Yes, feminists will disagree with each other very strongly on some issues.

From a meta perspective, there's even a threshold debate over whether it's considered primarily a liberational movement or an ideology/belief system, or both, etc.

But, from what I can tell, virtually none of them appreciate men coming along and casually deeming any woman to be a 'fake feminist' or 'just pretending to be a feminist' because that woman disagrees with them on certain issues.

To take an example--one can disagree strenuously with the works of someone like MacKinnon or Dworkin (I for one certainly do not agree with everything they have written), but it's really effing stupid--and quite frankly a red flag of bad faith--to say that Catherine MacKinnon and those who adhere to her school of thought aren't feminists.

And, to the extent one sees the 'they're not real feminists' card being played, it's being played by men who are trying to assert ownership of the definition of feminism. In other words, men who deep down oppose feminism's foundational idea that men shouldn't get to define women.


As a general rule, any man who tries to say that feminists who believe certain things aren't real feminists or aren't 'good feminists' are generally hostile to feminism where the rubber hits the road, and are more MRA types.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

5. I disagree. From my reading of threads

It is primarily women who tell other women they aten't real feminists and practically a traitor to their gender because they don't fall in line with a particular statement made by another woman claiming to be a REAL feminist.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

6. I think that pretty much echoes the OP's characterization of some acting as if their

version of feminism is a religion.

[kcr]

7. That is not how I read it.

Some women will jump into the fracas, sling personal attacks, and then fume about how everyone is being so nasty and claim they were accused of not being real feminists. Their interpretation is about as accurate as those who think the feminists here do nothing but attack men.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

8. So basically all should be judged by what they say

Anyone attacking another group of people is going to get called on it.

[kcr]

11. I just find that the standard isn't fairly or accurately applied

So much is made about how nasty a certain group is. It also seems to me that the people doing the most complaining about it are the ones who participate in the flame wars and fling some pretty nasty attacks themselves. But our takeaway from this is supposed to be how awful this one group is, and how they want to define a word?

[Pretzel_Warrior]

19. If males were out of the clear blue posting threads attacking feminisim day after day

I might agree with you. The large response you see is due to the seeming need of certain posters to continue inflaming this general discussion board with intractable and highly flammable viewpoints around feminism and perceived patriarchal domination, misogyny, etc.

I have the same response when I see gungeoners posting their highly flammable opionion and viewpoint here on GD.

I guarantee when posts about issues of feminism appear here and they are done in a way that doesn't automatically alienate males as some sort of disease the planet suffers from, then there tends to be better discussion.

[kcr]

20. As if there were feminists attacking men out of the blue day after day

but there isn't. Your equating feminist posts with gun nuts is very telling to me. "I guarantee when posts about issues of feminism appear here and they are done in a way that doesn't automatically alienate males as some sort of disease the planet suffers from, then there tends to be better discussion." Quite frankly, I don't think that's possible. For some, merely coming on DU and posting viewpoints about misogyny is enough to inflame. Their views are seen as an attack.

[geek tragedy]

36. You know, I've seen about one thread ever here that tended to

automatically alienate males as some sort of disease the planet suffers from,

it wasn't written by a woman, or a regular in feminist discussions.

We men need to be a little less defensive. If someone's talking about behavior that doesn't apply to us, then they're not talking about us.

[MattBaggins]

9. Perhaps you have a mental bias

and are reading what you wish to see into other peoples posts?

[geek tragedy]

17. You would be incorrect, here are some links from men

at DU trying to arrogate to themselves as men the right to deny that feminists can define their own movement, because they disagree with teh menz on prostitution, strippers and porn. In other words, deny men their entitlement to boners, and they react by trying to hijack the feminist movement in order to defend that entitlement.

Porn and prostitution defends roll call:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1114&pid=5312

Real feminists are about choice.

A great many people use that label but shouldn't. They rail against porn and consensual sex and try to enforce their opinions on other women.

The are fascists, not feminists. They talk about womens rights but really all they want is to control other adults.

/to the jury: ignore what my alerter writes about me. I am not bashing feminists, only the faux ones that claim porn is rape and seek to restrict and shame adults for enjoying sex.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024079616#post29

Not feminists. A few people who want to use the mantle of feminism to control others.

There are many real feminists at DU both sides of this issue but's only a very vocal few pseudo-feminists who are trying to demand that everyone must walk in lockstep with them.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2946396

I do not take the concerns of that small, vocal group of

Last edited Tue Jun 4, 2013, 06:08 PM - Edit history (2)

Cartoon Feminists that exist on DU seriously.

I think a number of times I've pointed that out succinctly.

Evidence seems to suggest that you don't comprehend the fact that your not comprehending.

Comprehend?



The real feminists, ones that are on DU and ones off DU. I take them very seriously.

From that same 'real feminist' dude:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2944493

Incorrect, not all feminists on DU...

Last edited Tue Jun 4, 2013, 11:06 AM - Edit history (2)

the ones generally pointed out on DU that are the cartoon feminists, the ones that insist on using the perpetual strawman arguments.

That select group that seems to think including all men the idea that all men are evil, in their broad brush stroke argument is a winning tactic.

Sort of like what your doing in describing the critics.

Even more from that enlightened man who has appointed himself the arbiter of feminism:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2944580

Again, spouting a bunch of talking points, doesn't make the fact you've got a small group of

cartoon feminists, operating on DU any less real.

By ignoring that, you actually damage the cause.

But hey, say what you like and ignore whats been said quite often.

I mean it's just a simple observation on my part.

Even MORE from the Pope of Feminism:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2733220

. I have been doing that with mainly the DU Fem Attack squad. Brings such peace of mind getting that

Last edited Mon Apr 22, 2013, 07:11 AM - Edit history (1)

select group eliminated.

Another man agrees:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2733349

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2733349

Oppose prostitution? Such women are merely JEALOUS of the women in prostitution (because they can't get laid ha ha ha), NOT FEMINISTS:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=163470

Truly. It's as if feminism has become to mean "I need to protect women from themselves."

They're not really feminists at all. They're either jealous of these women or have contempt for them because they do things that they themselves don't approve of. I have yet to see an argument come from this camp that hasn't boiled down to "Prostitution is different because it involves sex!". For some reason, I never hear them say "Coal mining is different because it involves coal!". They can't really explain why involving sex makes prostitution different from any other profession, they just imply that it's dirty and immoral. Generally, what it boils down to is that they're repulsed by the thought of exchanging money for sex and they insist that everyone else be as well. They simply want to impose their wills on others.

Think flashing boobs in order to get attention from men isn't effective at advancing women's rights? FAKE FEMINIST!



http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2627077

the only ones who oppose this are right wing religious fundies, fake feminists,

and people who still haven't got over the "nudity = bad" teachings of their childhoods, period, end of discussion.

Think putting more of the rape prevention onus on men instead of women is appropriate? OUTRAGE TROLL, NOT FEMINIST.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2494703

i don't even think many of them are actually feminists - mostly

Last edited Tue Mar 12, 2013, 03:17 PM - Edit history (2)

"outrage trolls" who posit a caricature of a humanistic or an extreme left wing position and attempt to control the discourse and DU through intimidation, swarming, and TOS shenanigans.

if the ultimate objective wasn't to get people PPR'd, i'd moderate my view a little.

but there's way too many "cartoonish" and extreme positions floating around here to make me believe many of these people are actual feminists.

Tell men what they don't want to hear about stuff that gives men boners? NOT A FEMINIST:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1114&pid=2560

I think most actual Feminists are focused on things like choice and equal pay

I honestly think it's really only a small, increasingly isolated minority that has some delusion about being able to put a stop to all the nekkidness and fuckin'.

Regarding women who say men need to get consent before having sex with a woman:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=280243

A woman who thinks feminism is about bashing men every opportunity they get.

It's a woman who tarnishes the reputation of actual feminists, whose causes I support, to spout misandrist bullshit all the time.

[kcr]

18. That should be an eye opener

But the argument will continue to be how awful the feminists are on DU.

[geek tragedy]

22. Another tactic: men hiding behind the skirts of women to attack feminists.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2944638

For awhile, I was under the impression that they dominated the feminist population at DU. Gratefully, they do not. When I repeated to other DU feminists some of the totally bizarre comments that the "cartoons" would spew, the rank and file distance themselves from the insanity. That was a huge relief to me.

Of course, they cannot link to a single DU feminist agreeing with them.

Closely related to the "feminism is obsolete" menfolk:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2945736

The Democratic platform already incorporates most of what people care about: economic equality and opportunity, legal equality, reproductive rights, and stopping violence against women.

That leaves little for certain feminists, which is why they start engaging in what you call "cartoon" behavior. Most progressive women needn't be feminists because Democrats take care of the issues that matter to them. They don't care about internet arguments, porn bans, raunchy jokes, opening doors, etc. Without sinking into the gutter and battling attention-seeking teenage internet trolls, they wouldn't have much visibility.

Certain threads are like flypapers for the MRAs here who feel the need to dominate and control how women describe themselves and seek to repudiate feminists as a group:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023735810

[seaglass]

33. Thanks for your work geek tragedy - I think a lot of us have seen these comments over time and they

do tend to leave an impression. And not a good one.

[geek tragedy]

40. allies of convenience are not allies.

If a man lashes out at women because what they say makes him enjoy porn or prostitution less, then they're really not an ally.

[seaglass]

45. Yep, I think the old expression for that is where the rubber meets the road. n/t

[geek tragedy]

48. just be a nice, polite, deferential feminist, and not one of those "in your face" feminists

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=32148

Feminism in general, yes.

Equal Rights for everyone. That means equal pay, equal responsibility, proper health care and equal everything else that matters. I can see no excuse for not having actual equality for everyone, no matter your gender, gender preference, skin color, ancestry, or anything else.

Do I mean some women's definition of what Feminism is? Not necessarily. Some of what is billed as Feminism is counter productive. For instance, the 'In Your Face' type Feminist, when their target is someone, usually a man and because he is a man, even though he understands, agrees and is trying to help, the man is attacked as an enemy to the cause anyway, no matter what he is saying, or trying to do to help. They seem to be looking for that word or a phrase, they can take exception to and they usually don't read or listen any farther... They have found their excuse to unload.

[laundry_queen]

49. +1

Yes, thank you geek tragedy.

[redqueen]

41. Outstanding.

[geek tragedy]

46. I know I've seen a lot of other examples.

But, seriously, the wrong is just so all over the place. But it only gets noticed when women talk back to men.

I mean, can you imagine the shitstorm if a radical feminist here went into the men's group and said that they shouldn't take out their frustrations in not getting laid on women?

But, when a man does it:

There needs to be a part six

Part six: I'm Sorry That You Are in Pain, But Please Stop Taking It Out on Men

Explaining why some women are their own worst enemy, when it comes to relationships.

Most of us men are NOT the problem, until you make it self-fulfilling. Stop painting the men you come across with a broad brush. We are as individual as women are. If all, or most of the men in your life treat you badly, for whatever reason, you should go look in the mirror for that reason. Either you are looking in the wrong places for men friends/relationships, or... You are the problem and they are just reacting to the way YOU are treating them.

I know what I am talking about here. I was in a relationship once (Just once) where i thought everything was just fine for several years. And every this was good. Then the mind games started. I had trouble accepting, as in, wrapping my mind around, what she was doing. There was a 3 minute Dating party, that fell through for her, only because 2 men she had invited, failed to show up. The party itself went fine. A couple of other times we went shopping for whatever. The real reason being, so she could scope out a salesman she was interested in. Or the weekend I went to visit my Dad, who lived 200 miles away. She ask me to pickup some brand of coffee they did not sell in Fargo. She chose this weekend to entertain her new boyfriend. I found out when I got back. Then there was all the piddly stuff in between, I have since forgotten.
This was the only women I needed counseling to uncouple from. I had trouble believing anyone could treat anyone else with this level of disrespect, when I had done nothing to deserve it.
Why was she like this? Because she had been in an emotionally and physically abusive, 20 year marriage and she absolutely refused to get help, counseling. I even offered to pay for it. No dice. And I am sure that my first name and he ex's first name being the same, didn't help any.
I paid the price, as did several other men she dated. She could only hold it together for so long, till the pressure built up. What made it worse was she could not let go of me because I treated her with respect. I specifically ask her once and she told me there were 3 or 4 men that treated her well, as I did. I don't emotionally abuse people. That is not my nature.
She would call me many months or even a year later, wanting to see me again. She was a good talker. This one relationship has made me sensitive to the danger signs. (There is a group here on DU loudly posting with those danger signs.) My advantage is, I see people as individuals. Women are people. Men are people. All people are individuals.

Now back to the modified excerpt: When one person with unresolved issues gets into a relationship, they spread their damage, their baggage, to the other person. It takes a toll on the other person. Now we have two people with problems. All too often, after the breakup, they think they are now OK because the relationship is over. Or 5 years has passed, or whatever. No so. The damage stays with both of them, because they are in denial of even having a problem. It is always the other person/people that has the problem. The baggage builds. Now we have two people in denial spreading their dysfunctions on to others. And back and forth it goes between the genders, as each gets into another relationship. Each always blaming the other gender, the other person, as being the problem. The broad brush --

There is help out there. More people should take advantage of it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=32095


And this (from the same guy who was pretending he was the goddamn Pope of feminism

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216333

. +10000

I stopped taking the "feminist" crowd on DU seriously long ago. They are simply using Feminism as a cover and real world women's issues to push their own hangups and agendas.

[redqueen]

55. The weirdest thing about that first one...

the article wasn't about personal relationships ... so that was just completely out of left field.

And its such a tired attack - its become a stock reply when a woman doesn't react the way a man thinks she should: 'who hurt you?' It's insulting but then so is so much of the antifeminist bullshit that is passed off as thoughtful discussion on the net.

[geek tragedy]

57. You see it all the time--even in this thread--men are rational logical, science-based

and feminists are just acting out on their hurt fee-fees and trying to burden the rational men out there with their emotional baggage.

Seriously, there is a ton of latent sexism here.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

23. thanks for the research. I think I see the misunderstanding. some of what you linked to is from

Men's group which I refuse to go to. I also don't spend any time in any of the 3 feminist discussion groups on DU. I come here to come together and find our common ground as Democrats--not be split by arguments of gender which is what those groups seem to spend a lot of time doing.

Your research is comprehensive, and i hope you had previously saved these rather than looking them up on my account. I didn't say men never say bad things about feminism or stupid things about feminisim. I see some of these are from early 2013 and even 2012. That's a long time to pull from when I was really saying specifically in my reading of these recent threads on GD, there was a fair amount of females trying to define feminism for other females.

[geek tragedy]

24. and my point was that feminists movement/ideological turf battles

are not something men have any business trying to join or adjudicate.

Like any movement or ideology worth a damn, their are going to be vigorous internal struggles and debates.
We see this with the Democratic party. Democrats fight all the time about where the party belongs, and what its core principles are. But, Republicans/Libertarians/Greens don't get a vote in that.

That's their movement, not ours. We can support their goals and be allies, but the idea of men trying to assert control over the defintiion of feminism is a direct attack on feminism itself.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

29. no kidding. As a practical matter, feminists should at least listen to allies

or else allies will be harder to come by.

Women at work are the rule not the exception.
Women can vote and hold many high offices in our nation.
Women are increasingly making it to the upper echelons of management in private and public sector.
Women are attaining higher education at higher percentage than men.
Women are now allowed into combat in the military.

Militant feminisim had a role to play when our society completely didn't respect women.

But it's time for other strategies and tactics which the luminaries within feminist movement realize and are actualizing.

[kcr]

38. Well, we can work, vote and go to school now, so every thing's fine.

Last militant feminist out the door, turn out the light. If only it were that simple.

True allies wouldn't take their ball and go home because some feminists don't agree with them. They were never true allies to begin with. And if there are so many of them that we have to worry about them? Then things aren't as fine as you claim they are.

[Pretzel_Warrior]

43. is that the essence of what you got from my post?

I was pointing out the need for strategies and tactics to change when circumstances have changed.

Women have been able to vote, go to school, and work for a very long time. It is more recently that women have seen great advances in sheer numbers doing so and in their increased work opportunities in fields previously shut off to them.

So......women still need to close the pay gap. That is a huge one. But militant shaming speech against men isn't necessary to achieve that. Lobbying and working within the political system that has many women as leaders needs to be used if you want efforts that are more effective. That's my way of thought. Similar to what MLK was advocating after Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Acts passed--focused on encouraging young black people to work within the system that is the true locus of power.

[kcr]

44. Yes, that is what I got from your post

"militant shaming speech"? Come on. I think I got it exactly right.

[geek tragedy]

50. can you post an example of militant shaming speech and tell us

why it's a broad-based attack on men?

[geek tragedy]

39. I agree that feminists benefit from listening to allies.

But, there are allies and then there are those who claim to be allies, so long as feminists don't disagree with them or advocate things that would inconvenience them.

There's not an insubstantial number of men who favor feminism insofar as it helps them attain sexual release (birth control, abortion increase women's sexual liberty) or save money (women earning incomes). But, when feminists start saying stuff that make them uncomfortable, whoa nellie.

[redqueen]

42. Bravo!

[geek tragedy]

53. LMAO. Thank you for proving my point. Women who disagree with you on boners

have per se "invalid opinions."

Thanks for the chuckle. Enjoy your brief stay at DU.

Always about the boner with some people, always.

[geek tragedy]

59. yes, yes, every logical human being accepts the fact that porn and prostitution are awesome

and should not be called into question.

Because it is a FACT that anything that might complicate men's decision to achieve orgasm without taking into account the needs of another human being is just MISANDRY omg!

[geek tragedy]

61. And the classic strawperson argument appears.

That you equate rape with consensual sex is where the backlash comes from.

Your life, you can do what you want, but don't expect approval from those who view women as more than an instrumentality to achieve male orgasm.

[gopiscrap]

62. welcome to DU

[Shankapotomus]

3. Just like it wouldn't be Communism

if all definitions didn't exclude capitalists, my own sense is, it wouldn't be Feminism if all definitions didn't exclude people like Social Darwinists or Cynical Egoists. To me it is obscene to grant such people the title of "feminists."

[Pretzel_Warrior]

4. I am outraged you compare feminism to communism

Not really. I just thought I'd jump in early to deflect from your salient points.

[MattBaggins]

10. Which points were salient?

[Iggo]

12. Step Zero.

Trash Thread.

[Vashta Nerada]

14. Yep.

There needs to be a separate forum for these topics.

Sorry about highlighting your "My Posts" tab.

[temporary311]

25. There used to be, sort of.

It was called meta. But while that forum itself got flushed, most of the floaters that necessitated the flushing were inexplicably left behind to drift where they will.

[sibelian]

13. Check these guys out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redstockings

"Redstockings were also opposed to male homosexuality, which they saw as a deeply misogynist rejection of women. Redstockings' line on gay men and lesbians is often criticized as homophobic."

Fucking morons. Making up whatever they wanted to believe from minute to the next.

Don't even get me started on the transphobes.

[geek tragedy]

28. Wow, you've managed to get yourself outraged by a fringe group from the Nixon/Ford/Carter era.

Note, btw, that the 'sex-positive' strain of feminism grew out of the Redstockings' founders and they fought viciously with MacKinnon and Dworkin, and also believed that lesbianism was a purely political matter and not one of personal identity.

In other words, good luck finding anyone here who doesn't think they were assholes.

[sufrommich]

31. Next you'll be trying to convince us that

the New Black Panthers aren't really representative of the civil rights movement.

[geek tragedy]

32. Hey, Megyn Kelly told me that I should be worried about a black dude

in a beret opening doors for people in Philly!

[TreasonousBastard]

15. Why bother going there...

when at this point there are a few people who must, when things are slow, reignite a gender battle, if not the war.

I don't doubt there's a woman with two kids and no child support out there trying to keep it all together and who doesn't give two shits about feminist theory or statistics on earnings. She's worried about her earnings and how to feed the kids.

Aside from whatever assistance I give to local organizations helping out with these, and other, problems I have no power to do much besides beg, sometimes demand, politicians do more to keep families together but not separate and alone.

But I can advocate, to whatever extent it's useful. Let's go back Hillary's besieged and largely forgotten book where she points out that we are a society and our "family" is really our community, and that extends from the block and then to the planet. Rather than the historic suspicion of the tribe over the hill, it's about time we realized that we're all a lot better off if we make friends with the tribe over hill.

If treat every member of our community with respect and compassion, everything else just falls into place.

(Yeah, fat chance of that.)

[MissMillie]

21. not "separate but equal"

but "different and equal"

I think for me I expect the law to treat me the same as any man.

But I don't expect every human being to treat me exactly the same as every other human being.

I would expect that every person would treat every member of the community w/ respect and compassion.


I know this post is all over the place. I guess I'm just having a hard time articulating what I'm thinking.

There are some words that when a woman says them to me, don't offend me. They may not even offend me when some men say them to me.

But coming from a different man--one with a different relationship to me--that word might get me pretty ticked off.

Respect (which I think includes an understanding of relationship/boundaries) and compassion.

[MineralMan]

16. As a man, I don't claim to be a feminist.

I'm an equalist. I treat everyone the same, regardless of any innate differences. I'm not about to get into a discussion of what feminism is and is not. That would make no sense, really.

[Squinch]

27. Trashing! And imagine:I don't feel any need to derail with posts about pounding meat!

Enjoy the discussion!

[seaglass]

35. Before you go Squinch please take a look at the work geek tragedy did upthread. n/t

[Glassunion]

30. Okay...

Popcorn

[Deep13]

34. "This stuff is OLD." At least we can agree on that. nt

[CTyankee]

47. This rambling post has confirmed a feeling that I have had for some time about some men who

somehow think "explaining" the "problems" with Feminism is incumbent upon them. That feeling is that these men are extremely nervous about the whole notion of feminism. It is deeply unsettling to them, for reasons that they alone have constructed in their minds and emotions. So they must set out to help everybody understand what Feminism truly is. They possess this extraordinary talent and genius and must pass it on to all...

[sibelian]

52. I've got no problems whatsoever explaining the problems of feminism.

I couldn't care less whether or not someone perceives me to be an "appropriate" conduit for my own opinions of political movements.

"That feeling is that these men are extremely nervous about the whole notion of feminism." - Hnk. That's the explanation that makes a substantial chunk of feminists feel good about *themselves*. Like most of their explanations for everything else.

Up to an including models of gender that de-legitimise masculinity, hence de-legitimising me. You can't have gender being a social construct without the insane idea of me being be sexually attracted to socially constructed chimeras, which is nothing more than another way of telling me my sexual orientation is a choice.

Don't try to pretend it isn't.

I am NOT interested in feminists' ideas about men. Nor yours.

[CTyankee]

54. There you go again!

You don't have to like me or my ideas (and you sure have some odd ones, ones I never in a million years could dream up myself).

Now don't get huffy. I wasn't attacking you...

[geek tragedy]

56. Well, if you can't justify opposing feminism on legitimate grounds, I guess you have

to fabricate bullshit such as claiming that feminists "de-legitimise masculinity" (they don't) or that the concept of gender as a social construct is homophobic (also false).

By your weird thinking, the only way to avoid being homophobic is to be both male supremacist/anti-feminist as well as transphobic.

Also, how do you feel about lesbian feminists?

Sorry, being gay doesn't excuse supporting sexism.

Ask Pab Sungenis.