Feminism or batshit insane-ism?

Fictionarious

New Member
That is to say, then, that there *is* no "feminist in-fighting." There is only ever feminist critique of non-feminist ways of thinking on the one hand, and, on the other, non-feminist critique of feminist ways of thinking. To frame it as "in-fighting" is to obscure the influence of external non-feminist forces within women, or groups of women, who may call themselves feminists; which is to say that non-feminist critiques are allowed a double voice, both from outsiders themselves and from those "within" the movement, for a net patriarchal effect, since feminist critiques are *only* made from within.

The call, then, to "support all feminists" is itself non-feminist, if by "support" one means to censor feminist critique of non-feminist elements in the thinking of women, or groups of women, who call themselves feminists.
This has got to be one of the most explicit and ironic instances of the No True Scotsman fallacy that I have ever witnessed.
 

borrofburi

New Member
Fictionarious said:
That is to say, then, that there *is* no "feminist in-fighting." There is only ever feminist critique of non-feminist ways of thinking on the one hand, and, on the other, non-feminist critique of feminist ways of thinking. To frame it as "in-fighting" is to obscure the influence of external non-feminist forces within women, or groups of women, who may call themselves feminists; which is to say that non-feminist critiques are allowed a double voice, both from outsiders themselves and from those "within" the movement, for a net patriarchal effect, since feminist critiques are *only* made from within.

The call, then, to "support all feminists" is itself non-feminist, if by "support" one means to censor feminist critique of non-feminist elements in the thinking of women, or groups of women, who call themselves feminists.
This has got to be one of the most explicit and ironic instances of the No True Scotsman fallacy that I have ever witnessed.
One might even go so far as to call it the True No True Scotsman...
 

Moky

New Member
It upset me to see this to a mild degree because this is the standard that most people view feminism. The reason a lot of people don't call themselves feminists when they are is because of women like her. I know the majority of people are feminists, but they have this perception that feminists are all man haters who want to cut dicks off. Hell, my sociology teacher tested this in class once. We had a section on Woman's Issues in Society and he asked the entire class (Almost the entire class was girls, there were only three guys) if they would consider themselves feminists. Only he and I raised hands. He then said, "Do all of you believe that women deserve to vote? Do all of you think women should be equal? Yeah? Then you're all feminists. Why didn't any of you raise your hands?" The main reason was that they didn't want to be seen as Nazi's. The prevalence of the misconception is something that truly bothers me. I hate that when I say I am a feminist, people call me a femi-nazi. I had this one dense bitch tell me because of my views, I think women should dominate men. One of the last things I'll ever advocate is female dominance over males. I don't want any group having dominance over another.
 

malinhardly

New Member
I am sure she could define rape as something a man can make a woman, and perhaps dismiss the rape by man whether deserved or secretly encouraged by the victims.
 

malinhardly

New Member
I know hear from critics who claim that Palin does not share my political point of view. But what makes them so sure? As governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin does not appoint Justice Morgan Christian who is pro-choice and a former board member of Planned Parenthood, becoming the second woman from Alaska Supreme Court judge.
 

Giliell

New Member
What the hell...?
I agree with the others, that's pure sexism, and as usually, it goes against both sexes at the same time.
Rape-victim for having a loving relationship with the man I chose to have or not have sex with?
Idiots.
And yes, people like this have given feminism a bad name.
I usually prefer to call myself emancipated.
 

Giliell

New Member
Certainly, some women do enjoy sexual congress with males, and thereby take eager part in their own oppression (and ours, those of us who don't) .
Cool, I always wanted to be an oppressor, or at least half of one. I'm oppressing them. And it is such fun!
 

ImprobableJoe

New Member
Giliell said:
Certainly, some women do enjoy sexual congress with males, and thereby take eager part in their own oppression (and ours, those of us who don't) .
Cool, I always wanted to be an oppressor, or at least half of one. I'm oppressing them. And it is such fun!
...and twice on Sunday? :lol:

As a man, it it occasionally (if rarely in my case) difficult to tell if someone has crossed the line from feminism into misandry, so a woman's perspective can help solidify and confirm my first impression. Thanks! :D
 

Giliell

New Member
ImprobableJoe said:
As a man, it it occasionally (if rarely in my case) difficult to tell if someone has crossed the line from feminism into misandry, so a woman's perspective can help solidify and confirm my first impression. Thanks! :D
Well, with clearly insane stuff like that it's not taht hard to tell :lol:
But if you want my personal rule of thumb: When they start talking about being somewhat better, or all the bad things in the world happening because of men, then they've crossed that line.
Also when they violently start attacking other women who disagree and want to tell them what to do and how to behave. Or as one of Rita Mae Brown's ingenious characters put it: I don't give a damn about any movement that cares about the colour of my nails.

To me, there are two equally erroneous branches of feminism (there are a lot other branches, of course, those are the extreme positions):
The first one starts with the assumptioon that there are no differences at all between men and women, blantantly ignoring science and psychology. Which of course fails with quite a lot of women who don't feel represented by this.

The second one is the one here that assumes that men and women are fundamentally different and that men are bad and women are good. A clear fail, too.
 

DeistPaladin

New Member
To me, there are two equally erroneous branches of feminism (there are a lot other branches, of course, those are the extreme positions):
The first one starts with the assumptioon that there are no differences at all between men and women, blantantly ignoring science and psychology. Which of course fails with quite a lot of women who don't feel represented by this.

The second one is the one here that assumes that men and women are fundamentally different and that men are bad and women are good. A clear fail, too.
That's a good analysis.

If I may add, as we move past political correctness, the lesson we need to learn is that equality doesn't require interchangeability. The two genders can be different and yet get equal pay for equal work, etc. Insisting that gender is purely cosmetic is neither necessary nor helpful.
 

Nautyskin

New Member
lrkun said:
Girls will be girls. Maybe they just experienced a situation wherein they were left by their boyfriends for another girl. ^-^
Although I loved this response, and I also think it might likely hold some truth (her dad beat/raped her or beat/raped her mother, or she was raped by a man or her mother told her all men are rapists because she was raped or her mother's mother was raped .. WHATEVER) it doesn't really excuse this kind of blatant and vicious sexism.

It's just disgusting and really does sicken me to read what these women are writing. These are some dangerously unhealthy minds we're listening to here.

I agree with most of what the other posters here have said, but I don't think most people would think of what we're seeing here as 'feminism' - at least I know I don't.

Vote 1 for "batshit insane-ism".
 

pdka2004

New Member
borrofburi said:
Pennies for Thoughts said:
The Marxist feminists run with the idea that a new communist revolution will end gender inequality despite the fact that as Wikipedia notes, "... most Marxist forerunners claimed by feminists or "marxist feminists" including Clara Zetkin and Alexandra Kollontai were against feminism." The sorry record of the USSR, China, Cuba and North Korea on women's rights doesn't seem to sway them either.
I've been told that china isn't that bad on women's rights.

You are correct, the chinese government has a history of treating everyone equally badly - regardless of gender

I always labored under the impression that true feminists wanted social and legal equality. To claim that one gender is intrinsically better than another is sexism, it doesnt matter which gender is making the claim
 

televator

New Member
Ironic how in combating sexism, some women have turned to vilifying all males as aggressive rapists and murderers....which is sexist.
 

Andiferous

New Member
Well, the first problem is that as long as there is still perceivable sexism that disadvantages women in our society, then some will try to find it in other places - even when it's not really there. Sexism is completely irrational so can sometimes spin an irrational response.

I've also conversed with a few feminist separatists, and I do wonder sometimes if they have actually had a very traumatic experience that caused the radicalism.

Incidentally, "A Room of one's own" is a book by Virginia Woolf from the turn of the century, and considered a sort of landmark for feminist philosophy. And it really is in no way unreasonable. If you consider this in terms of the late Victorian/Edwardian period, the premise is that men had their own private rooms for their own business, but women did not. Since she was always in public rooms, a female writer of the period might have more difficulty finding a quiet place in which to work. A mother would be heavily criticised if she went into a room by herself and locked the door. These women couldn't even vote yet, and were not yet "persons" under the law. The blog seems like a bit of a corruption of the book, really.
 

Giliell

New Member
@Andiferous
Well, it's one thing to long for a private study (I'm craving for a hobby room. I'm planning to get one as soon as my eldest starts college) and another one to kick the guy out of the house
 

Andiferous

New Member
Certainly (I think the blog is crazy myself), although...
Giliell said:
@Andiferous
Well, it's one thing to long for a private study (I'm craving for a hobby room. I'm planning to get one as soon as my eldest starts college) and kicking the guy out of the house
I'm inclined to be mischievous... :twisted:
 

Giliell

New Member
Andiferous said:
Certainly (I think the blog is crazy myself), although...
Giliell said:
@Andiferous
Well, it's one thing to long for a private study (I'm craving for a hobby room. I'm planning to get one as soon as my eldest starts college) and kicking the guy out of the house
I'm inclined to be mischievous... :twisted:
Hmm, if I think about it, it would be better to get rid of the kids :D
 
Top