Why so much hatred for feminism?

[KingMerv00]

You started a thread asking why people hate feminists and you are confused about the vitriol?

Not so much confused as disappointed that so much vitriol was aimed at me personally. Most, if not all, of the reasons listed for hating feminists do not apply to me or came from personal experiences beyond my control (like their encounters with radical feminists in college). If I explicitly disavowed myself from being a "man-hater" or "bootlicker", it was assumed I MUST be lying because feminists by definition are man-haters and bootlickers. Question begging at its finest. Further, I think any fair minded person would look back at this thread and agree that I never "asked for it" by resorting to personal attacks. (When I did get a little snarky, I apologized.)

This isn't about sympathy. To be honest, my self-esteem is the same as it was when I started the thread and I learned quite a bit. I'm asking people see to the difference between the group they hate and the individual they might not. I've seen naive Christians get ruthlessly shredded by self-important jackasses just because someone dares to mention Jesus. I'd be lying if I said I hadn't been the jackass from time to time but this is the first time I've been on the receiving end. It woke me up to how petty and cruel people can be just to prove a supposedly intellectual point.

Not everyone was petty and it would be wrong of me to rant about overgeneralizing and then make the same mistake myself. Avalon, Tyr and others remained respectful throughout. I thank them for keeping the high ground.

 

[KingMerv00]

A man currently is FORCED to take care of a child he does not want if a woman he slept with elects not to have an abortion. He cannot give the child up for adoption. If the woman wants to keep and raise the child he is forced to take care of it for 18 years. If he doesn't he can be arrested and thrown in jail.

This is happening NOW. But no lets brush it off as nothing. Why? Because the woman must always be kept in the spotlight as a victim. The guy not.

Why we feel as we do was explained more than once by me and others and you never bothered to respond. Instead, you do exactly what you accuse us of doing. You brush us off and victimize an entire gender.

Disagree with us on our actual positions not on your preconceptions thereof.

 

[truethat]

Why we feel as we do was explained more than once by me and others and you never bothered to respond. Instead, you do exactly what you accuse us of doing. You brush us off and victimize an entire gender.

Disagree with us on our actual positions not on your preconceptions thereof.

I don't see an explanation. Please explain. So I can reference this response exactly.

We have a current situation in the US where men are forced with the threat of being jailed to pay for children they do not want. They are forced at the whim and desire of the woman they had sex with. If she has an abortion he's off the hook. If not, he's screwed.

Plenty of these women have tried to trap men into relationships by lying about using birth control.

We say to the men "keep it in your pants and always use a condom" yet as the abortion thread shows, saying this to women is pooh poohed as ridiculous.

If feminists are about the equality of reproductive rights then why aren't they out there trying to get men the right to give their unwanted child up for adoption? If the birth mother keeps the child then good for the child. What is the difference between a woman giving a child up for adoption and a man doing the same thing?

So this is happening now. It happens daily. Why doesn't this matter to you enough to do something about it?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No according to me they will ALWAYS be out numbered which they were. This is just pandering nonsense of fear and drama when you know full well it will never go through.




Let's focus on what "might" happen to women, even though we know it never will, and ignore what IS happening to men.

So now your definition of "fringe" is "always be outnumbered"?

And your prediction that the balance will never tip the other way is naive. Look at the polls, the spate of 'personhood' bills and other anti-abortion legislation currently being proposed or passed, the make up of SCOTUS and position of the Republic Party which BTW has a majority in the House at this moment.

Your that it "can't happen here" is not evidence based.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

probably didn't pay attention and was responding to someone else's post. But my point is that feminists like to present the idea of women as victims, and if they aren't victims now, then they could be "'potential victims" IF this or that happened.....

You can't seem to get beyond this theme.

Interesting story, when it came to elevatorgate, (now that I recall that sordid affair) me and those on my side took the exact opposite point of view. I do believe there were a fair number of us who viewed the victim aspect as anti-feminist and promoted the idea the others were blind to the anti-feminist position they were inadvertently presenting.

So while I get it some feminists hypocritically take victim positions sometimes, you are wrong to lump everyone into that narrow category.

 

[KingMerv00]

I don't see an explanation. Please explain. So I can reference this response exactly.

I think I'm done getting into serious debates in this thread. If you really want to know, word search "physical autonomy" in this thread. I suspect you will still consider my argument to be "victimizing women" but at least you'll be doing so from the correct foundation.

We say to the men "keep it in your pants and always use a condom" yet as the abortion thread shows, saying this to women is pooh poohed as ridiculous.

*Starts to type...realizes that this would constitute a "serious debate"...stops typing*

 

[truethat]

You can't seem to get beyond this theme.

Interesting story, when it came to elevatorgate, (now that I recall that sordid affair) me and those on my side took the exact opposite point of view. I do believe there were a fair number of us who viewed the victim aspect as anti-feminist and promoted the idea the others were blind to the anti-feminist position they were inadvertently presenting.

So while I get it some feminists hypocritically take victim positions sometimes, you are wrong to lump everyone into that narrow category.

No I'm not. I'm lumping you bookitty and King Merv into this category. I have plenty of feminist friends that are intelligent, balanced and fair and are looking for equality for everyone and examining gender roles and other things.

They would not do as you all have done in this thread which is to dismiss any issue that is related to men as less important than the issues that effect women.

King Merv says he wants to have a dialogue and I've put it to him to simply answer the question which he won't do.

If you all are so balanced and fair, then why do you insist on trying to victimize women in numerous discussions about women's issues. Additionally why do you want to pretend white men have automatic " privilege" in life because of the color of their penis?

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No I'm not. I'm lumping you bookitty and King Merv into this category. [snipped the rest of the baseless nonsense]

Yes, you are, along with mis'judging' 95% of the posts you've replied to here.

 

[truethat]

No I'm not. If I was the only one who was interpreting your posts this way then maybe you could get away with blaming it on me. Other people have posted and additionally pmed me saying how disgusted they were in the thread and unwilling to even bother engaging with you all.

You are biased towards your own prejudice. You won't even consider the way you come across not just to me but to others as well.

At least I have had the decency on this site to admit that I know I'm a impatient beotch in my posting style.

But no, yet again you are playing the victim card.

 

[KingMerv00]

...They would not do as you all have done in this thread which is to dismiss any issue that is related to men as less important than the issues that effect women...

...Additionally why do you want to pretend white men have automatic " privilege" in life because of the color of their penis?

I can't speak for bookitty and Ginger but I have acknowledged the existence and importance of sexism against men at least a dozen times in this thread. I've mentioned "overlapping bell curves" about 5 or 6 times. I know for a fact you have seen at least some of these posts.

Considering this event and previous behavior, I can safely conclude you are blinded by your certainty, a pathological liar, or suffering from some kind of undiagnosed brain tumor. Whatever the cause, my advice is identical: seek medical attention.

You'll note (and given your history, immediately forget) I have abandoned my previous level of civility. Be assured it is not because you have worked me into an intellectual corner. I am not angry at your argument, I am angry at how you argue. Other, more dignified spokespeople for your side of the argument will retain my respect.

It is best I end this post now before I insult you in way I might regret later.

You are now the second person on my ignore list. Keep Bill company.

 

[truethat]

I can't speak for bookitty and Ginger but I have acknowledged the existence and importance of sexism against men at least a dozen times in this thread. I've mentioned "overlapping bell curves" about 5 or 6 times. I know for a fact you have seen at least some of these posts.

Considering this event and previous behavior, I can safely conclude you are blinded by your certainty, a pathological liar, or suffering from some kind of undiagnosed brain tumor. Whatever the cause, my advice is identical: seek medical attention.

You'll note (and given your history, immediately forget) I have abandoned my previous level of civility. Be assured it is not because you have worked me into an intellectual corner. I am not angry at your argument, I am angry at you, truethat. Other, more dignified spokespeople for your side of the argument will retain my respect.

It is best I end this post now before I insult you in way I might regret later.

You are now the second person on my ignore list. Keep Bill company.

Nah you can insult me I don't care. And I know people will say they are putting people on ignore as a way of not having to respond once they get cornered by something they don't want to talk about.

Most people threaten to put me on ignore but rarely do. Anyways I actually like how polite you are King Merv, however people are just way too sensitive on here. You stirred up a hornets nest and then wonder why some of the comments burn?

You have interjected into the conversation when men and women on this site have tried to answer the OP. Which is why is there so much animosity. The two posters I have mentioned demonstrate quite clearly why people have animosity towards feminists.

Any of the issues in this thread could be discussed. any of them. So to me this thread is not about discussing the issues raised but by pointing them out as things that ought to be considered.

I will say that you have been less likely to dismiss the concerns of men. I commend you for that. However I am precisely answering the OP and I have pointed that out to you several times.

When I presented ideas in the thread it was not to discuss them, they have already been discussed elsewhere by Skeptic Ginger and bookitty and myself and others. So please keep that in mind.

So to answer the OP. When feminists act like Skeptic Ginger and bookitty it comes across as labeling men, loads of misogyny lots of misandry and patronizing of women by labeling them as helpless victims, confirmation bias and lies.

If you back up people that do that, you will get burned as a consequence of leaping into the flames. If you don't agree with the actions above then DON'T SUPPORT THEM. If you do then don't complain if you get burned in the process.



ETA for the record I think the bootlicker comments were over the top and I don't agree with those at all.

 

[Marcus]

probably didn't pay attention and was responding to someone else's post. But my point is that feminists like to present the idea of women as victims, and if they aren't victims now, then they could be "'potential victims" IF this or that happened.

Ex. If abortion is overturned which ain't ever going to happen and we all know it.

Men are complaining about things happening to them NOW and we're being told that even though it's important it doesn't effect as many men as the POTENTIAL things that could happen to women.

The post above nailed it beautifully.


Right now we say it is unfair for women to be forced to have a child for which she is not prepared to raise. That if she chooses not to have a child for economic reasons it is a violation of her rights to force her to have a child.

Funny thing though, even if she didn't have an abortion she can have the baby and give it away, abdicating all responsibility for it.

ALL

A man currently is FORCED to take care of a child he does not want if a woman he slept with elects not to have an abortion. He cannot give the child up for adoption. If the woman wants to keep and raise the child he is forced to take care of it for 18 years. If he doesn't he can be arrested and thrown in jail.

This is happening NOW. But no lets brush it off as nothing. Why? Because the woman must always be kept in the spotlight as a victim. The guy not.


Man and woman go home drunk and have sex together. The woman initiates it and jumps on the guy seducing him. They both go for it. She wakes up the next day and regrets it and accuses him of rape.

He is accused, not her. He is the one who is expected to have total control even when drunk. He can't say "Well you raped me." Nope, if she's drunk she is the victim. If he is drunk he is always still the perpetrator. She can't consent while drunk. But if he is drunk he is still supposed to be in control.

Why haven't they both raped each other? Because the woman must always be kept in the spotlight as the victim.

These aren't potential problems. These things happen NOW. Men's lives are ruined because of them. Do feminists care? Nope.

Let's talk about a potential law that wasn't passed in Michigan instead.

That was very well said, truethat. I don't care how this post does or doesn't relate to the views of the posters on this thread, the content stands alone.

 

[curi0us]

I can't speak for bookitty and Ginger but I have acknowledged the existence and importance of sexism against men at least a dozen times in this thread. I've mentioned "overlapping bell curves" about 5 or 6 times.

Did you notice my response on the issue privilege and how your "overlapping bell curves" just shows you didn't understand how the term was actually applied?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8024826&postcount=494

I realize there are a lot ideas going back and forth and it is impossible to respond to all of them but I think the privilege concept is really key to understanding the problem with feminism. In order to address sexism and racism the feminists and critical race theorists cultivated a very bigoted way of discussing issues that rightfully offended a lot of people.

 

[truethat]

did you notice my response on the issue privilege and how your "overlapping bell curves" just shows you didn't understand how the term was actually applied?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8024826&postcount=494

i realize there are a lot ideas going back and forth and it is impossible to respond to all of them but i think the privilege concept is really key to understanding the problem with feminism. In order to address sexism and racism the feminists and critical race theorists cultivated a very bigoted way of discussing issues that rightfully offended a lot of people.

this

 

[KingMerv00]

Did you notice my response on the issue privilege and how your "overlapping bell curves" just shows you didn't understand how the term was actually applied?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8024826&postcount=494

I realize there are a lot ideas going back and forth and it is impossible to respond to all of them but I think the privilege concept is really key to understanding the problem with feminism. In order to address sexism and racism the feminists and critical race theorists cultivated a very bigoted way of discussing issues that rightfully offended a lot of people.

I did miss that post. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Not sure I'll be motivated enough get to it but I'm glad to know it is there.

To be clear, I don't think everyone ignored my bell curve comments.

 

[AlaskaBushPilot]

I know you don't care.

Got that right.

 

[crimresearch]

No I'm not. If I was the only one who was interpreting your posts this way then maybe you could get away with blaming it on me. Other people have posted and additionally pmed me saying how disgusted they were in the thread and unwilling to even bother engaging with you all.

You are biased towards your own prejudice. You won't even consider the way you come across not just to me but to others as well.

At least I have had the decency on this site to admit that I know I'm a impatient beotch in my posting style.

But no, yet again you are playing the victim card.

LOL! The famous Appeal To INVISIBLE Authority







(tribute)

 

[truethat]

LOL! The famous Appeal To INVISIBLE Authority







(tribute)

I guess you are not actually READING the thread then. I am not the only one who disagrees with them very strongly.

 

[Moss]

Just out of curiosity, who are the "Them" you refer to? You seem to fight a position none of the selfidentified feminists in this thread hold.
I also find the "feminists victimize women" meme to be entirely unproductive. Because part of the message of feminism seems to be "there are things that are less than ideal and we can try to change them". Which I perceive to be the polar opposite of victimization.
I also think all "the real victims are..." to be unnecessarily divisive. That implies we have to decide which side is REALLY suffering and can then only support one. While people here actually demonstrate this to be untrue. Finding common ground has to be a goal if you want to change genderbased discrimination. Without support from those not directly targeted the goal to free people from confining stereotypes cannot be reached. Telling them "you actually don't have it so bad, my problems are worse" is a punch in the face, not an overture.

 

[truethat]

Several of the posters in this thread, myself included, have already had lengthy discussions with Skeptic Girl and bookitty in several other threads over the years. Their angle always seems to be to segregate women into victims and men into perpetrators by the nature of having the "privilege" of being a white cisgendered male.

It's annoying. However the "them" extends to feminists who act like they do who are generally disliked by people in society who do not like the idea of treating men as if they are inherently responsible for all the problems in the lives of women.