ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 11th April 2019, 11:07 AM   #241
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,632
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Nothing I have said implies everyone should get the same results.
Good, then we agree on the fundamentals.

Quote:
What I am saying is that you can't just look at inequal results and throw your hands up and say 'that's just the way it is' without some justification that the inequal results are justified
Absolutely correct. Good thing it's not what I'm doing. What I'm doing is asking whether we have good reason to think that there's some injustice or problem going on? Your responses seem to assume that there is by the simple fact that an imbalance exists, which would, in my view, mean that you're assuming that there IS an underlying problem without justification, because without such a problem there would be balance. I don't think you've demonstrated the latter, and the presence of the imbalance is not enough to make that demonstration.

Quote:
No, I quite clearly said if you are willing to accept inequality WITHOUT a justification then you are not in favour of equality.
Ok fair enough.

Quote:
because systemic differences like that don't happen by accident.
How would you know? There are plenty of at-large differences that aren't deliberate. For an obvious example, the average male is much stronger than the average female in all cultures. But the cause of that isn't discrimination or systemic issues. It's biology, in this case.

Quote:
I am saying you don't get to assume there IS a harmless reason for inequality until you show there is.
I don't think that's a reasonable standard. I mean, at some point you have to demonstrate that a problem exists before you convince people that action is required, no?

Quote:
The causes ARE unjustified until they are justified. That's just how words work.
Well one can always play with the words until they "mean" what the person wants. Watch: Instead of the above, how about I say "The causes are not problematic until they are SHOWN to be problematic. That's just how words work."?

It's easy to phrase something in order to bias the conclusion in your favour. The question is, what is a justified and productive way of identifying and dealing with problems? It's not whether we can phrase it in a way that puts the burden on someone else, but whether it's a reasonable way to proceed. And I don't think it's reasonable to assume a problem exists without making a demonstration that it does.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:08 AM   #242
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,274
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
I looked at voat. Jews and GMO corn, sports fans are closet gays, anti-vax posts and the Christchurch killer referred to as "Saint Tarrant."

Maybe don't read that stuff?
I feel compelled to delve into things that scare me in an attempt not to "other." It sounds good, but it doesn't always work when things get really extreme. However, by that point, my anxiety keeps me rooted.

Think a hypochondriac compulsively looking up diseases, maybe? I'm okay with that analogy.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:11 AM   #243
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,632
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
No, see, the comments I was reading that were on my mind when I made my post were about how angry seeing women at the grocery store made a bunch of posters. It was somewhere on Reddit. The thread was full of posts where these guys seethed about different angers seeing women at the grocery store caused them. Talking about they know they're teasing people and they're being bitches about it. Or seeing couples kiss and laughing to themselves because "that bitch is cheating on him." Seriously. I was reading it going, WOW, jesus h, what the ****. Ugly this, "Stacy" that. Which grocery stores are these, so I can avoid them? (No way to tell.)

Anger at sighting women other places was mentioned too, of course, but the topic started about grocery stores, and they stayed prevalent because it's a common place to see both women and couples (I guess).

It was nuts. The more I think about it, the more sure I am this occurred in the now-banned incel community on Reddit, but back when it was newer and not quite as balls-out crazy.
Right, but it's people online saying these things. You don't know if that translates to A) what they really think and B) actions they would take in real life. I'm not saying none of them look at you and think "damn, that independant woman! I'd punch her in the face!" but rather I'm clarifying that the 'grocery' part of your post was extrapolation from opinions read online.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:20 AM   #244
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,274
This same compulsion, as noted above, drives me to radfem web areas as well. I truly despair of the things some of them say. It's kind of unbelievable. I wind up wondering if they're serious. They sound pretty serious. They say things like "I would never trust a man again," after paragraphs of ranting about how men suck and are poisonous and should essentially be shot into the sun, and I'm gaping at the screen. Yeah, not with that attitude! They regard men like garbage, like monsters, spend pages of posts reinforcing that idea together, then get upset when they don't trust or get along with men IRL. Then use it as evidence that men are the worst. They actually speak as though men are plotting together, as a monolith, to hold women down in all these subtle ways. It's absurdity.

Meanwhile, the actual garbage monsters are rising up and using the radfem's BS to grow their membership. Men get offended when they hear and read that nonsense, because it's offensive. And other factions of feminism get a bad rep and baggage they don't deserve. It starts getting complicated. It's like gender factions are fighting for the Iron Throne. I don't want that.

The extremes are radicalizing each other continuously, and the effect is rippling inward and infecting certain moderates. There's so much cultural baggage now, I could never call myself a feminist nor an MRA, though what I actually believe in is equality and freedom and fairness and quality of life for both. I just don't think things are as bad as all these extremists say, but they're going to keep getting worse until everyone stops the nonsense. Which, I mean, who can make that happen? The nonsense is its own entity by now.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:23 AM   #245
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,274
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Right, but it's people online saying these things. You don't know if that translates to A) what they really think and B) actions they would take in real life. I'm not saying none of them look at you and think "damn, that independant woman! I'd punch her in the face!" but rather I'm clarifying that the 'grocery' part of your post was extrapolation from opinions read online.
Quite true! And I do remind myself of that when I get a little too "shaking chihuahua" about the whole mess.

I certainly don't avoid going to the grocery store because of it, or anything. I go about my business freely. It's an unpleasant thought that crosses my mind from time to time, however. And lately, with mildly increasing frequency. I can't deny that.

Last edited by isissxn; 11th April 2019 at 11:25 AM.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:40 AM   #246
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
There's so much cultural baggage now, I could never call myself a feminist nor an MRA, though what I actually believe in is equality and freedom and fairness and quality of life for both.
See, I just don't think those people and their nonsense have anything at all to do with me or feminism as I understand it. I see them as broken people with mental and emotional problems more than feminists. #menaretrash has nothing to do with stuff like fighting conservatives (male and female) who think women suspected of having an abortion should be put on trial and executed if found guilty in a court of law.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:57 AM   #247
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
There is no reason for a pro-men's group to be antifeminist, but antifeminism is alive and well in these circles.
My God. The Duluth Model of domestic violence, which is directly based on feminist ideology, is the PRECISE REASON there are almost no shelters for male victims because this ideology reclassifies male victims as perpetrators.

Patriarchy theory, which is a central tenet of feminism, is the precise reason men's issues are ignored or ridiculed in society; men don't need help, they are privileged in society.

What on earth do you think feminism actually is? It is NOT egalitarianism; it is an offshoot of Marxism except the oppressor/oppressed groups are men and women rather than the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

You do seem to be what Karen Straughan calls a 'Coffee Shop Feminist'; you mistakenly imagine feminism to be a synonym for egalitarianism. This is NOT the case; feminism is the doctrine that women as a group are oppressed by men as a group.

This is why so many feminists think MRAs are arguing that men are oppressed as a group. As one of my favourite MRA youtubers bane666au put it, 'Way too many feminists are addicted to the oppressor/oppressed dynamic so that when an MRA says that men have issues too, that is as well, they somehow hear it as 'only men have issues and are being oppressed by women'.

In the west, men are not oppressed as a group and women are not oppressed as a group. In some situations women have it worse and it some situations men have it worse. The latter is something that no feminist who has actually studied their subject and hasn't simply assumed it means 'treat everyone equally, amirite?' would agree with.

Of course nobody in their right mind would argue with your apparent definition of feminism (egalitarianism), but I'm afraid that definition is wrong. Utterly, utterly wrong. Feminism is a specific ideology of female oppression by men/patriarchy on a general, societal level.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 11:59 AM   #248
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
anti-feminists - People who oppose feminist ideology. Given that a huge number of men's issues are a direct result of feminist ideology and its influence on society, it is unsurprising that most MRAs are also antifeminists. In my opinion, if you're an MRA and not an antifeminist then you don't know very much about feminist ideology and imagine that feminism means wanting to treat everybody equally, which it does not. That's egalitarianism.
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Same here.

I think you should consider reconsider feminism.
Apparently we still don't agree on terminology.

By the way, I consider myself a feminist, under kellyb's definition.

ETA: Or see Georgio's most recent post that more clearly shows that we are using the same words, but with different meanings.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

Last edited by Dr. Keith; 11th April 2019 at 12:05 PM.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:05 PM   #249
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
My God. The Duluth Model of domestic violence, which is directly based on feminist ideology, is the PRECISE REASON there are almost no shelters for male victims because this ideology reclassifies male victims as perpetrators.
How does it do that?

Quote:
Patriarchy theory, which is a central tenet of feminism, is the precise reason men's issues are ignored or ridiculed in society; men don't need help, they are privileged in society.
I think we lean patriarchal as a species, in the sense that bonobos are matriarchal and chimps are patriarchal.

Quote:
What on earth do you think feminism actually is? It is NOT egalitarianism; it is an offshoot of Marxism except the oppressor/oppressed groups are men and women rather than the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

No, feminism goes back to wanting the right to vote. There's a direct lineage from then to now with feminism.

Quote:
In some situations women have it worse and it some situations men have it worse. The latter is something that no feminist who has actually studied their subject and hasn't simply assumed it means 'treat everyone equally, amirite?' would agree with.
I know men have it worse sometimes. I think everyone should be treated equally. "Feminism" means different things to different people.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 11th April 2019 at 12:19 PM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:07 PM   #250
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
In any case, it's rather nice to see a discussion of these finer points and issues outside of Reddit-type places (which I like to refer to as "cyberhell"). Thanks to pharphis and Georgio (and others) for making it possible. I'm actually learning things, and my mind is getting busy.
Thank Cavemonster rather than me. I was asked a number of times to start a thread and didn't because I suspected I would just get the same nonsense I was getting in the other thread (the very worst kind of arguments from ignorance) but the quality and reasonableness of this thread so far has proved me utterly wrong.

Thanks everyone for engaging properly!
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:11 PM   #251
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,274
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
See, I just don't think those people and their nonsense have anything at all to do with me or feminism as I understand it. I see them as broken people with mental and emotional problems more than feminists. #menaretrash has nothing to do with stuff like fighting conservatives (male and female) who think women suspected of having an abortion should be put on trial and executed if found guilty in a court of law.
I just mean, do you worry about people misunderstanding what you mean when you state your affiliations? Because these terms can mean so many things to so many different people? That's where my hesitations stem from. It's the same reason I have trouble characterizing my politics in label-form. Nothing seems to quite fit, and everything available has all kinds of bad meaning associated with it in society that I don't want to battle against.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:13 PM   #252
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
Of course nobody in their right mind would argue with your apparent definition of feminism (egalitarianism), but I'm afraid that definition is wrong. Utterly, utterly wrong. Feminism is a specific ideology of female oppression by men/patriarchy on a general, societal level.
Um.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Screenshot 2019-04-11 at 2.19.11 PM.jpg (16.1 KB, 3 views)
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:17 PM   #253
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
I just mean, do you worry about people misunderstanding what you mean when you state your affiliations? Because these terms can mean so many things to so many different people? That's where my hesitations stem from. It's the same reason I have trouble characterizing my politics in label-form. Nothing seems to quite fit, and everything available has all kinds of bad meaning associated with it in society that I don't want to battle against.
Well, people usually get a sense of who I am, what I'm about, and how I think before feminism ever comes up, so it's really not much of an issue most of the time. "Feminist" is only a minor part of how I see myself. It's not a primary passion of mine.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:18 PM   #254
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
Thank Cavemonster rather than me. I was asked a number of times to start a thread and didn't because I suspected I would just get the same nonsense I was getting in the other thread (the very worst kind of arguments from ignorance) but the quality and reasonableness of this thread so far has proved me utterly wrong.

Thanks everyone for engaging properly!
I really was trying to help. But yes, Cavemonster actually did help, so I tip my fedora in his general direction.

I'm glad you are getting better results over here.

You even learned about Bob! It takes most posters much longer to figure that one out.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:22 PM   #255
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,978
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
My God. The Duluth Model of domestic violence, which is directly based on feminist ideology, is the PRECISE REASON there are almost no shelters for male victims because this ideology reclassifies male victims as perpetrators.

Patriarchy theory, which is a central tenet of feminism, is the precise reason men's issues are ignored or ridiculed in society; men don't need help, they are privileged in society.

What on earth do you think feminism actually is? It is NOT egalitarianism; it is an offshoot of Marxism except the oppressor/oppressed groups are men and women rather than the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.

You do seem to be what Karen Straughan calls a 'Coffee Shop Feminist'; you mistakenly imagine feminism to be a synonym for egalitarianism. This is NOT the case; feminism is the doctrine that women as a group are oppressed by men as a group.

This is why so many feminists think MRAs are arguing that men are oppressed as a group. As one of my favourite MRA youtubers bane666au put it, 'Way too many feminists are addicted to the oppressor/oppressed dynamic so that when an MRA says that men have issues too, that is as well, they somehow hear it as 'only men have issues and are being oppressed by women'.

In the west, men are not oppressed as a group and women are not oppressed as a group. In some situations women have it worse and it some situations men have it worse. The latter is something that no feminist who has actually studied their subject and hasn't simply assumed it means 'treat everyone equally, amirite?' would agree with.

Of course nobody in their right mind would argue with your apparent definition of feminism (egalitarianism), but I'm afraid that definition is wrong. Utterly, utterly wrong. Feminism is a specific ideology of female oppression by men/patriarchy on a general, societal level.
I had this exact conversation just 3 weeks ago.

They said:

"However, just because society systemically discriminates again men by putting a lower premium on male lives does not make men societally oppressed."

and I said:

"I NEVER said men were oppressed. That is your framework for gender relations, not mine.

I didn't even say "men have it worse than women in general" (though they arguably do in many areas) because I think this is unproductive thinking on the topic. "


They then bowed out saying I get a weird takeaway from things.
uhh ok.


As for feminism being about female oppression, I'm largely in agreement but I think it can be generalized just slightly to "women's advocacy" because that's what it is and always has been: advocacy for women (this is usually the secondary definition listed. Often, but not always, this is based on seeking equality for women to men. What is often pretended out of existence is the lack of advocacy for men where they are unequal.

Not to mention the other issues like framing gender-neutral problems as women's issues (ex/ Duluth model). There's even some crazies that think women shouldn't be in prison at all (they already are a minority of those in prison and this is actually a men's issue if anything)

Last edited by pharphis; 11th April 2019 at 12:28 PM.
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:29 PM   #256
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Um.
Oh, you're not serious, are you? Tell me you're not being serious.

'The Ministry Of Love'? 'The Democratic People's Republic Of Korea'?

Come on. All 'Involuntary Celibate' literally means is someone who is celibate and doesn't choose to be; if you actually look at what incels say there is a LOT more to it than that.

And if you actually look into what feminists say there is a lot more to it than the dictionary definition. I really, really hope you're joking with that.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:34 PM   #257
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
@pharphis
It's truly amazing sometimes. The only system some people seem able to process is the oppressor group/oppressed group. You can say over and over and over again that you are not arguing that men are oppressed and that you're simply questioning that women are, and they will pause and say something like, 'OK then...so who is oppressed and who is the oppressor?'

It's like they've had the first few pages of The Communist Manifesto surgically implanted into their spinal cord.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:36 PM   #258
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
Oh, you're not serious, are you? Tell me you're not being serious.

'The Ministry Of Love'? 'The Democratic People's Republic Of Korea'?

Come on. All 'Involuntary Celibate' literally means is someone who is celibate and doesn't choose to be; if you actually look at what incels say there is a LOT more to it than that.

And if you actually look into what feminists say there is a lot more to it than the dictionary definition. I really, really hope you're joking with that.
I'm not joking at all. My feminism and many of my friends' feminism is of the dictionary definition type. We're everywhere. We stay away from the man-hating, oppression-obsessed cult crowds. Feminism is a minor part of our lives.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 12:39 PM   #259
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
Oh, you're not serious, are you? Tell me you're not being serious.

'The Ministry Of Love'? 'The Democratic People's Republic Of Korea'?

Come on. All 'Involuntary Celibate' literally means is someone who is celibate and doesn't choose to be; if you actually look at what incels say there is a LOT more to it than that.

And if you actually look into what feminists say there is a lot more to it than the dictionary definition. I really, really hope you're joking with that.
And yet, when I say that I believe in feminism I mean exactly as that word is defined in the post you quoted. To say it doesn't mean that requires some sort of modifier, like "radical feminism" or some such.

You saying that all feminist believe what "a few who call themselves feminist" believe is a bit like me saying all men's rights advocates believe what "a few who call themselves men's rights advocates" believe.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 01:42 PM   #260
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
And yet, when I say that I believe in feminism I mean exactly as that word is defined in the post you quoted. To say it doesn't mean that requires some sort of modifier, like "radical feminism" or some such.
Only if Merriam-Webster has the final say on reality. But to anyone who understands the history and mainstream tenets of feminist theory the idea that it is a movement that seeks equality is laughable.

That's the thing, it's not 'a few'; it's the mainstream feminist theory that is taught in gender studies courses throughout the world; it is the most commonly applied model of domestic violence treatment in the world and so on. There's some famous footage of a group of protesters outside a Warren Farrell talk at a university that was going to talk about men's issues including suicide; the people that tried to get into the talk were blocked from doing so and received torrents of abuse from the protesters. One student was filmed getting right up in someone's face and saying, quote, 'You're **** scum. You're **** scum. Incest supporting, rape apologising, woman hating **** scum. You're **** scum.' Another member of the group was asked why they were 'protesting' this talk and her answer was, 'I'm here as part of my women's studies course'.

Merriam-Webster is not an arbitrator of what is and isn't accepted in mainstream feminist theory. You have to look at what the mainstream literature and dogma of a group itself is saying and name yourself accordingly. You and kellyb are egalitarians (this is very good), not feminists. You imagine you are rejecting a 'crazy few' on the fringes but you are not; you are rejecting the mainstream of the ideology.

Feminists making out that their movement is an egalitarian one is nothing but PR. I could find hundreds of quite sickening quotes from completely mainstream feminists with enormous influence (Clementine Ford, Jessica Valenti, Jess Phillips, Andrea Dworkin, Julie Birchill) talking about female supremacy, how it's fine to hate men, how we shouldn't care that young men are killing themselves and should 'let them go' because they are too weak willed to cope with life ('let them go' is a genuine Birchill quote) and so on but the only people you will find who spout that kind of stuff about women are either part of groups which are diametrically opposed to the men's rights movement (traditional conservatives, incels, pick up artists) or separate and not necessarily related to it (mgtows).
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy

Last edited by Georgio; 11th April 2019 at 01:44 PM.
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 01:44 PM   #261
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Quote:
You and kellyb are egalitarians (this is very good), not feminists.
We are literally dictionary definition feminists.

Quote:
You imagine you are rejecting a 'crazy few' on the fringes but you are not; you are rejecting the mainstream of the ideology.
I don't know how many feminists are like me vs like the cultists. I'd guess 70% like me, 30% like them as a totally wild guess. You just don't see those of us who are egalitarians because we're not obsessed with it and out to pick fights about it, etc and so on.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.

Last edited by kellyb; 11th April 2019 at 01:49 PM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:14 PM   #262
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
We are literally dictionary definition feminists.
OK, accepted. You are 'dictionary definition feminists'; but the dictionary definition of feminism is wrong. Sorry, but it is simply wrong. I'm a feminist by the dictionary definition.

Quote:
You just don't see those of us who are egalitarians because we're not obsessed with it and out to pick fights about it, etc and so on.
I do see them, but they're not feminists. You can't be a feminist and an egalitarian. To those outside of the discussion this probably looks extremely petty but it really isn't. There's two methods to define the word:

1. Look at the most influential members, what they say and what they advocate.
2. Look at the dictionary.

If you're only going to do 2 then fine, you are a feminist. But, I think by your own admission, if we're doing 1 then you're not.

And always remember, you do not have to be a feminist to advocate for women's rights. I am a women's rights advocate. Feminism is a specified ideology with a specific literature. It's like calling someone who says, 'I believe in God' a Christian, Jew or Muslim. These ideologies are specific; the fact that they may share a single tenet (belief in a God) does not mean they are the same thing at all.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy

Last edited by Georgio; 11th April 2019 at 02:16 PM.
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:18 PM   #263
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,274
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Well, people usually get a sense of who I am, what I'm about, and how I think before feminism ever comes up, so it's really not much of an issue most of the time. "Feminist" is only a minor part of how I see myself. It's not a primary passion of mine.
I think it comes down more to my personality and my own issues. I'm definitely not faulting you for using the labels you find appropriate and standing up for their un-twisted meaning. I'm not faulting anybody who does that. I'm just personally pretty conflict-averse (it's gotten worse in the past few years), and I'm quite leery of labeling myself anything lest I appear to declare "alliances" and become part of some fight I don't want any part of. I just despair at the conflict-ridden societal environment we've got going here (society, I mean, and the web in general, not ISF). I know I'm probably paranoid. I accept that; I'm an anxious person. But my concerns aren't baseless either. I didn't invent them, even if my mind exaggerates them sometimes.

Calling myself "egalitarian" might convey that neutrality I want to convey pretty well. I'm not a blank slate, nor do I pretend to be one. I have views, and some of them are strongly held and passionate. But most of them are more uncertain and genuinely moderate, seeing soundness and flaws in all stark positions at hand. And even the passionate ones I've got don't comply with standard "team divisions."

So I just really don't want to alienate anybody when these important social topics come up, because I genuinely, deeply think there needs to be less polarization, and how can we achieve that if we don't listen to each other?

I've got issues of guilt, too. I definitely haven't always been a saint to men. I was kind of a wild youth, and there was a lot of dumb thinking. In my small microcosm of the universe, I may have helped create some of this, in a way. I don't mean I ever chased riches on a c**k-carousel or called regrettable sex rape or whatever nonsense incels say. I just mean I was vain and flighty and weak, and yes, promiscuous by most people's definition. Though nothing like the "hookup culture" people, I got around a bit. I thought it was empowering and loving. Maybe it was, but maybe it was gross too. I just don't know. And I feel tremendous anxiety and guilt about this not knowing. I can't get rid of the thought. Retreating into feminism as a label when I feel that way on the inside seems duplicitous.

Man, that probably made no sense. I just got done with work and I really tried to explain, but my thoughts are probably disjointed. I never voice this stuff, so I didn't have the right words.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:25 PM   #264
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
Only if Merriam-Webster has the final say on reality. But to anyone who understands the history and mainstream tenets of feminist theory the idea that it is a movement that seeks equality is laughable.
I don't know what feminist theory is. I know what a feminist is. My experience of what a feminist is happens to be accurately reflected by the dictionary definition of that word.

It is possible that feminism and feminist theory are not the same thing. I don't know, but I see you using that phrase a lot and I don't use it. i looked it up on wikipedia and got:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia
Feminist theory is the extension of feminism into theoretical, fictional, or philosophical discourse. It aims to understand the nature of gender inequality.
This doesn't sound like what you are talking about, but maybe I'm missing something.

Quote:
That's the thing, it's not 'a few'; it's the mainstream feminist theory that is taught in gender studies courses throughout the world; it is the most commonly applied model of domestic violence treatment in the world and so on. There's some famous footage of a group of protesters outside a Warren Farrell talk at a university that was going to talk about men's issues including suicide; the people that tried to get into the talk were blocked from doing so and received torrents of abuse from the protesters. One student was filmed getting right up in someone's face and saying, quote, 'You're **** scum. You're **** scum. Incest supporting, rape apologising, woman hating **** scum. You're **** scum.' Another member of the group was asked why they were 'protesting' this talk and her answer was, 'I'm here as part of my women's studies course'.

Merriam-Webster is not an arbitrator of what is and isn't accepted in mainstream feminist theory. You have to look at what the mainstream literature and dogma of a group itself is saying and name yourself accordingly. You and kellyb are egalitarians (this is very good), not feminists. You imagine you are rejecting a 'crazy few' on the fringes but you are not; you are rejecting the mainstream of the ideology.

Feminists making out that their movement is an egalitarian one is nothing but PR. I could find hundreds of quite sickening quotes from completely mainstream feminists with enormous influence (Clementine Ford, Jessica Valenti, Jess Phillips, Andrea Dworkin, Julie Birchill) talking about female supremacy, how it's fine to hate men, how we shouldn't care that young men are killing themselves and should 'let them go' because they are too weak willed to cope with life ('let them go' is a genuine Birchill quote) and so on but the only people you will find who spout that kind of stuff about women are either part of groups which are diametrically opposed to the men's rights movement (traditional conservatives, incels, pick up artists) or separate and not necessarily related to it (mgtows).
I don't know those people and I bet I would have to search hard to find someone who did.

Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
We are literally dictionary definition feminists.


I don't know how many feminists are like me vs like the cultists. I'd guess 70% like me, 30% like them as a totally wild guess. You just don't see those of us who are egalitarians because we're not obsessed with it and out to pick fights about it, etc and so on.
We are on the same page.

I'm also a dictionary definition "father" and "husband". I wonder if those words have new meanings I should look into.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:29 PM   #265
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
Calling myself "egalitarian" might convey that neutrality I want to convey pretty well.
Or people may assume you are really into birds of prey.

Words don't always convey their dictionary definitions, after all.


ETA: your whole post did make sense, I'm just being flippant because it is the end of the day and I'm tired.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.

Last edited by Dr. Keith; 11th April 2019 at 02:31 PM.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:30 PM   #266
isissxn
Rough Around the Edges
 
isissxn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Deep Storage
Posts: 5,274
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Or people may assume you are really into birds of prey.

Words don't always convey their dictionary definitions, after all.
I am really into Birds of Prey! It was a fine Live album.
isissxn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:34 PM   #267
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
I do see them, but they're not feminists. You can't be a feminist and an egalitarian. To those outside of the discussion this probably looks extremely petty but it really isn't. There's two methods to define the word:

1. Look at the most influential members, what they say and what they advocate.
2. Look at the dictionary.

If you're only going to do 2 then fine, you are a feminist. But, I think by your own admission, if we're doing 1 then you're not.

And always remember, you do not have to be a feminist to advocate for women's rights. I am a women's rights advocate. Feminism is a specified ideology with a specific literature. It's like calling someone who says, 'I believe in God' a Christian, Jew or Muslim. These ideologies are specific; the fact that they may share a single tenet (belief in a God) does not mean they are the same thing at all.
You say "Look at the most influential members" like it's a club when it's not. And I'm sorry but you have no authority to say "You can't be a feminist and an egalitarian."

I'm a feminist of the dictionary definition sort.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:40 PM   #268
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
I think it comes down more to my personality and my own issues. I'm definitely not faulting you for using the labels you find appropriate and standing up for their un-twisted meaning. I'm not faulting anybody who does that. I'm just personally pretty conflict-averse (it's gotten worse in the past few years), and I'm quite leery of labeling myself anything lest I appear to declare "alliances" and become part of some fight I don't want any part of. I just despair at the conflict-ridden societal environment we've got going here (society, I mean, and the web in general, not ISF). I know I'm probably paranoid. I accept that; I'm an anxious person. But my concerns aren't baseless either. I didn't invent them, even if my mind exaggerates them sometimes.

Calling myself "egalitarian" might convey that neutrality I want to convey pretty well. I'm not a blank slate, nor do I pretend to be one. I have views, and some of them are strongly held and passionate. But most of them are more uncertain and genuinely moderate, seeing soundness and flaws in all stark positions at hand. And even the passionate ones I've got don't comply with standard "team divisions."

So I just really don't want to alienate anybody when these important social topics come up, because I genuinely, deeply think there needs to be less polarization, and how can we achieve that if we don't listen to each other?

I've got issues of guilt, too. I definitely haven't always been a saint to men. I was kind of a wild youth, and there was a lot of dumb thinking. In my small microcosm of the universe, I may have helped create some of this, in a way. I don't mean I ever chased riches on a c**k-carousel or called regrettable sex rape or whatever nonsense incels say. I just mean I was vain and flighty and weak, and yes, promiscuous by most people's definition. Though nothing like the "hookup culture" people, I got around a bit. I thought it was empowering and loving. Maybe it was, but maybe it was gross too. I just don't know. And I feel tremendous anxiety and guilt about this not knowing. I can't get rid of the thought. Retreating into feminism as a label when I feel that way on the inside seems duplicitous.

Man, that probably made no sense. I just got done with work and I really tried to explain, but my thoughts are probably disjointed. I never voice this stuff, so I didn't have the right words.
No, I completely hear every word and thought, and I understand. It makes sense.

On the divisiveness issue, I know some atheists who call themselves agnostics because they don't like the baggage that comes with the label "atheist". I can respect that, too.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:43 PM   #269
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,978
Originally Posted by isissxn View Post
I think it comes down more to my personality and my own issues. I'm definitely not faulting you for using the labels you find appropriate and standing up for their un-twisted meaning. I'm not faulting anybody who does that. I'm just personally pretty conflict-averse (it's gotten worse in the past few years), and I'm quite leery of labeling myself anything lest I appear to declare "alliances" and become part of some fight I don't want any part of. I just despair at the conflict-ridden societal environment we've got going here (society, I mean, and the web in general, not ISF). I know I'm probably paranoid. I accept that; I'm an anxious person. But my concerns aren't baseless either. I didn't invent them, even if my mind exaggerates them sometimes.

Calling myself "egalitarian" might convey that neutrality I want to convey pretty well. I'm not a blank slate, nor do I pretend to be one. I have views, and some of them are strongly held and passionate. But most of them are more uncertain and genuinely moderate, seeing soundness and flaws in all stark positions at hand. And even the passionate ones I've got don't comply with standard "team divisions."

So I just really don't want to alienate anybody when these important social topics come up, because I genuinely, deeply think there needs to be less polarization, and how can we achieve that if we don't listen to each other?

I've got issues of guilt, too. I definitely haven't always been a saint to men. I was kind of a wild youth, and there was a lot of dumb thinking. In my small microcosm of the universe, I may have helped create some of this, in a way. I don't mean I ever chased riches on a c**k-carousel or called regrettable sex rape or whatever nonsense incels say. I just mean I was vain and flighty and weak, and yes, promiscuous by most people's definition. Though nothing like the "hookup culture" people, I got around a bit. I thought it was empowering and loving. Maybe it was, but maybe it was gross too. I just don't know. And I feel tremendous anxiety and guilt about this not knowing. I can't get rid of the thought. Retreating into feminism as a label when I feel that way on the inside seems duplicitous.

Man, that probably made no sense. I just got done with work and I really tried to explain, but my thoughts are probably disjointed. I never voice this stuff, so I didn't have the right words.
too late, now you're an enlightened alt-centrist supremacist
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 02:57 PM   #270
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
You say "Look at the most influential members" like it's a club when it's not. And I'm sorry but you have no authority to say "You can't be a feminist and an egalitarian."
It's not a club but it is a specified ideology which is far removed from egalitarianism.

Quote:
I'm a feminist of the dictionary definition sort.
Wonderful - so am I!
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:00 PM   #271
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I'm also a dictionary definition "father" and "husband". I wonder if those words have new meanings I should look into.
'Husband' does indeed have different meanings depending on what culture you're talking about. It's not an ideology with an examinable literature but a legal status.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:11 PM   #272
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
No, I completely hear every word and thought, and I understand. It makes sense.

On the divisiveness issue, I know some atheists who call themselves agnostics because they don't like the baggage that comes with the label "atheist". I can respect that, too.
I had a whole paragraph about the atheist/agnostic issue but decided not to derail this thread. Your approach is much better than what I had written.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:16 PM   #273
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 18,208
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
It's not a club but it is a specified ideology which is far removed from egalitarianism.
This is not meant to be confrontational, but I don't really think you have supported this claim. I'm not really sure what I would consider support for this claim, though.

I mean, if someone calls me a satanist I feel pretty comfortable relying on the dictionary definition of satanism and pointing out that I don't meet that that definition. I don't really need to dig into satanism much to understand whether I fit the definition. Same with most isms.

Why should I disregard standard reference material in this case?


Quote:
Wonderful - so am I!
That alone makes me feel much better about MRAs and makes me interested in learning how to tell the misogynist who claim to be MRAs from the non-mysogynist MRAs.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:18 PM   #274
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 19,686
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I don't know those people and I bet I would have to search hard to find someone who did.
The only one I had heard of was Andrea Dworkin who used to be a fairly radical anti-pornography crusader along with Catherine MacKinnon.

Quote:
Andrea Rita Dworkin (September 26, 1946 – April 9, 2005) was an American radical feminist and writer best known for her criticism of pornography, which she argued was linked to rape and other forms of violence against women.
carlitos is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:40 PM   #275
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,632
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
We are literally dictionary definition feminists.
There are radical feminists, and there are literal feminists.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:44 PM   #276
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 80,632
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
It's not a club but it is a specified ideology which is far removed from egalitarianism.
Georgio, is it possible that various subgroups of people who consider themselves "feminist" might have a different view of what the word means, and that the majority of them view it as it's written in the dictionary? After all, sure, dictionaries don't determine reality but they reflect common usage.

This discussion is pointless. Plenty of people who call themselves "feminist" are radicals who espouse the ideology you described. Plenty of them don't. So how about you give Kelly some slack and accept that she's the type of feminist she claims to be?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 03:58 PM   #277
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,978
Again, there are 2 dictionary definitions. One is "equality for everyone" and the other is "advocacy for women". Advocacy for women doesn't necessitate the exclusion of male advocacy but in practice it often does, or paints males as "the problem". Many feminists make it abundantly clear that feminism is about women's issues, not men's. "coffee shop feminists" (again, not the ones in power or academia) are egalitarians who disagree with this notion (but still largely support the movement in general - hence using the label and telling others that the label means 'what I, an egalitarian, am')

In practice, these are overlapping to some extent but is it no surprise that there are mixed messages about this? After all, a huge majority of people agree with "equality" but a tiny fraction of the population calls themselves feminist.
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 04:32 PM   #278
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 11,070
Originally Posted by pharphis View Post
Again, there are 2 dictionary definitions. One is "equality for everyone" and the other is "advocacy for women". Advocacy for women doesn't necessitate the exclusion of male advocacy but in practice it often does, or paints males as "the problem".
None of the feminists I hang out with (all dictionary definition feminists) see males as the problem. We mostly see human nature and conservatism as the problem.

What country are you in?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
I am proud to say that Henry Kissinger is not my friend.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 04:34 PM   #279
Hlafordlaes
Disorder of Kilopi
 
Hlafordlaes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: State of Flux
Posts: 9,837
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
... Married men can often be heard referring to their wives as “the boss”, but women who refer to their husbands that way are considered oppressed.

Happy wife happy life? Inherently misandrist.

Any of these strike a nerve?
Living as I do where the local culture is still a few centuries behind, not much I could say with much specific relevance to the places most board members hail from. But I thought I might pick a kindly nit, if you will.

You see, I think a good woman is better than gold. Gold isn't even in the same category of goodness. By "good" I mean one guided by her conscience. Whether perfect or no; not the point. (By "woman" I mean that person who is the more nurturing of the two in a couple, the one spending more time thinking about others and not herself.) Someone possessing a North star, a Jiminy Cricket in female guise, if you will. That woman* you put in charge of your household and behave yourself. It will make the entire family better off. In the end, it's really a question of style and good graces, a way of always nodding to the good first, and everyone ends up with a fair say in all things.

* Things often do work out that it's a woman. And no matter which gender, the corollary is, you stay away from the ones lacking conscience.** Or you do like that top French exec I worked for, who contracted for a childless marriage with an Italian exec living in Italy, common vacations and a pooled investment plan. I'm sure he's fine and feels he's happy. Not my cuppa.

Anyway, no matter who exactly is playing the conscientious and nurturing role in a couple, I think that ought to be recognized, prized, cherished and honored. Gold. And everyone else wipes their muddy feet and does their chores. (Of course I exaggerate, no mindless bots, or shirking adult responsibility, more a question of manners and respect.) I speak as an entirely spoiled husband with an incredibly loving wife (yeah, yeah "she'd have to be", thanks).

TL;DR: "Happy wife happy life? Inherently misandrist." No.


**ETA: LIke my cardboard first wife.
__________________
Driftwood on an empty shore of the sea of meaninglessness. Irrelevant, weightless, inconsequential moment of existential hubris on the fast track to oblivion.
His real name is Count Douchenozzle von Stenchfahrter und Lichtendicks. - shemp

Last edited by Hlafordlaes; 11th April 2019 at 04:40 PM.
Hlafordlaes is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2019, 05:24 PM   #280
pharphis
Graduate Poster
 
pharphis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 1,978
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
None of the feminists I hang out with (all dictionary definition feminists) see males as the problem. We mostly see human nature and conservatism as the problem.

What country are you in?
I agree, any feminist I've ever hung out with (that I'm aware of) and the majority of feminists don't necessarily blame men.

But then when the radicals, and those with voices in politics or academia or the media speak it is quite obviously blaming men for everything (patriarchy theory - I understand you don't quite align with this but think we "lean patriarchal" iirc). Patriarchy theory frames gender issues as solely women's issues (or predominantly, if we're being generous) and perpetrated by men. Patriarchy theory is what all the non-coffee-shop feminists believe in. I've found many moderate feminists who I've had discussions with also accept the same premises even if they don't instinctively blame men ie they accept all the same dogma regarding domestic violence, sexual violence, "privilege", etc. I don't blame them, or even the average non-feminist (the majority of people) for 2 reasons.

1) We seem biased towards caring about female suffering in general, and even minimize female perpetrators (ex/ "what did he do to cause her to hit him", "he must have hurt her", "the vast majority of female-perpetrated domestic violence is self-defense")

2) There has been consistent pro-feminist propaganda on these fronts for decades. Even those that don't accept the extreme things seem to believe most of the watered down tenets. See how popular White Ribbon is, or general fear-mongering about women "walking alone at night" being uniquely at risk.

I hope that makes sense even if you disagree.

edit: I also generally see trad cons as against male interests. I'm not sure I'd say "conservatism" is a problem. It is sometimes. I think we need a mix of conservatives and progressives - forever, probably - to keep advancing but reel in the crazies.

I'm Canadian, and we have a feminist prime minister atm.

Last edited by pharphis; 11th April 2019 at 05:26 PM.
pharphis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.