Why are people friends with annoying people?

[Artemis97]

Then you have best friends....they help you move bodies.

I wish we had upvotes, you would get my +1.

[2D8HP]

Then you have best friends....they help you move bodies.

Oh for Lolth's sake...

Well played.

[Xyril]

Feminism isn't a monolith, you don't speak for every feminist.

This is Razade asserting that feminism isn't a monolithic group, and mocking someone for allegedly claiming to have some authority over who is a feminist and what opinions are feminist.

If you find the former associating with the latter to be a problem, clean up your own house.

This is Razade taking that same person to task for not doing a better job policing who is a feminist and what opinions are feminist.

There are feminists who champion castrating all men on a national holiday and keeping their sperm for making kids, putting the now castrated men in a second class who work until they're dead. There are feminists who champion equality.

This is Razade implicitly labeling certain people as feminist.

It's neither my job nor my right to tell people how they identify. I'm not in the in group,

This is Razade disclaiming that he has neither the right nor the responsibility to decide who is labeled a feminist.


I am having trouble reconciling these apparent inconsistencies.

I am also curious what you think the appropriate conduct would be for all involved, since you apparently have strong opinions about what isn't appropriate conduct. For example, as you point out, feminism (and really, pretty much any social movement or group that is loosely united by something other than a centralized hierarchy) isn't monolithic, and there isn't an official litmus test of who belongs. So let's say that there's a group called "gamers." They share some interests and for some period of time could generally reach a consensus on who is or isn't a gamer. The main gamer group grows, becomes more diverse in thought--there is less consensus about who is or isn't a gamer. Some think that a shared history creates a big enough tent to encompass many subgroups with sometimes inconsistent beliefs on certain issues--others demand more ideological purity. Perhaps a small, outside group comes in that also calls itself gamers, but are different enough that even the disparate groups that can't come to a consensus on who is a gamer somehow all manage to agree that everyone in this new group isn't a gamer.

In your view, what is the right thing for everyone to do here? Are the outsiders wrong for usurping the label "gamer," and if so, in a society that recognizes the right to free speech, what actions can the original gamers take to, in your words "police themselves"?

[Xyril]

They do. They're the ones who jump out defending female teachers that are caught having sexual relations with their students, despite the fact that if the genders were reversed, they would be up in arms demanding the male teacher's head.

Okay, the assertion is made. Now evidence is demanded. It's actually pretty easy on your part--you're not making a claim about the hypocrisy of a movement in general. All you have claimed is that there exist multiple individuals who 1) calls him or herself a feminist 2) at some point, defended a female statutory rapist and 3) at some point, condemned male statutory rapists.

So, just to keep the theme of threes, go ahead and name three of those people, and cite the instances where they did those three things. If it's as prevalent of a problem as you claim, and if it bothers you as much as it clearly does, you probably don't even have to do any research, since you already have folks in mind.

Here's the thing about hypocrisy: It's only meaningful when an individual (or perhaps a very top-down organization) is inconsistent. You don't get to whine about hypocrisy (well, you have a legal right to, but people will just realize you're either intellectual dishonest or just intellectually challenged) just because a bunch of guys who consider themselves libertarians and a different bunch of guys who consider themselves evangelical conservatives expressed different views on an issue, despite the fact that both guys ended up picking the same party from our two party system.

Do you also get triggered by "mansplaining" and "manspreading"?

No, but those words are one of those rare pairs where I often find both the people who use those terms seriously and those who use those terms to mock the ones who use them seriously to be obnoxious human beings. Present case included.

[Razade]

This is Razade asserting that feminism isn't a monolithic group, and mocking someone for allegedly claiming to have some authority over who is a feminist and what opinions are feminist.

This is Xyril beginning to set up a false argument. This is Razade beginning to counter that. Because what I said there is accurate.

This is Razade taking that same person to task for not doing a better job policing who is a feminist and what opinions are feminist.

Here is the start of that person of straw. Saying something isn't a monolith does not in anyway invalidate the ability to disagree with people in your in group and try to counter what they're saying if it's harmful to your cause. That's not making a monolith, that's pushing out radicals. Which anyone who wants to castrate all men clearly is.

This is Razade implicitly labeling certain people as feminist.

No it isn't. Everyone I linked called themselves feminists. Demonstrably. I've no more labeled them than you have. They've labeled themselves. I am not implicitly doing anything other than using the term they've used for themselves when discussing them. So this is Xyril saying I'm doing something I am very implicitly not doing.

This is Razade disclaiming that he has neither the right nor the responsibility to decide who is labeled a feminist.

I don't and I haven't labeled anyone one. I've only used the labels those people have used to describe themselves.

I am having trouble reconciling these apparent inconsistencies.

The inconsistancies are yours and yours alone I'm afraid. I don't have them and I don't want them.

I am also curious what you think the appropriate conduct would be for all involved, since you apparently have strong opinions about what isn't appropriate conduct.

I don't need to have what's appropriate to point out what's not appropriate. I can point out radical behavior in say...the United Bass Fisher's Union for over-fishing but not have to have a way to fix that issue.

For example, as you point out, feminism (and really, pretty much any social movement or group that is loosely united by something other than a centralized hierarchy) isn't monolithic, and there isn't an official litmus test of who belongs

Because they're not. I don't understand how that is in anyway a controversial statement.

So let's say that there's a group called "gamers." They share some interests and for some period of time could generally reach a consensus on who is or isn't a gamer.

I'd not take part in that and take them to task for the very same thing I'm taking Amazon to task over. It isn't up to another person to tell someone what they are or not. It's up to the person to say what they identify as. If someone who doesn't play games but then calls themselves a gamer uses that label...I'll find it ODD...I'll ask why they use that term but I won't tell them they're not. That's not up to me.

The main gamer group grows, becomes more diverse in thought--there is less consensus about who is or isn't a gamer. Some think that a shared history creates a big enough tent to encompass many subgroups with sometimes inconsistent beliefs on certain issues--others demand more ideological purity. Perhaps a small, outside group comes in that also calls itself gamers, but are different enough that even the disparate groups that can't come to a consensus on who is a gamer somehow all manage to agree that everyone in this new group isn't a gamer.

The former is correct. Labels are wide ranging things. A feminist can be conservative, a feminist can be a neo-con, a feminist can be religious or non-religious. A feminist can want to castrate all men, a feminist can not want that. Wanting (or like Amazon claiming there is) ideological purity is a fools errand.

As for the rest, again it's not up to other people to tell others what their labels are. If both groups identify as gamers then they'll invariably have to actually talk about what they believe and how they see that identifcation working in their every day life instead of using a simple word.

In your view, what is the right thing for everyone to do here?

Mind their own damn business on what labels people use for themselves because they're mostly meaningless?

Are the outsiders wrong for usurping the label "gamer," and if so, in a society that recognizes the right to free speech, what actions can the original gamers take to,

They're not. Words mutate and change over time, they're no more wrong for using language than anyone else is. As for what can the original gamers do? Either use the term still and clarify what they mean when they say gamer or find a different term.

in your words "police themselves"?

I never once used the words "police themselves". You must have me mistaken for someone else. I said for people to clean their own house? I guess you could construe that as "police themselves" but then you couldn't really use "in your words" because those aren't my words. They're your words.

[Mikemical]

Okay, the assertion is made. Now evidence is demanded. It's actually pretty easy on your part--you're not making a claim about the hypocrisy of a movement in general. All you have claimed is that there exist multiple individuals who 1) calls him or herself a feminist 2) at some point, defended a female statutory rapist and 3) at some point, condemned male statutory rapists.

So, just to keep the theme of threes, go ahead and name three of those people, and cite the instances where they did those three things. If it's as prevalent of a problem as you claim, and if it bothers you as much as it clearly does, you probably don't even have to do any research, since you already have folks in mind.

Here's a handy link that recopilates several case, and saves me the time from having to write down more.

I could go take a dive in Tumblr to find the cases about women getting a slap on the wrist for having sex with underage boys being celebrated, when I'm feeling like getting some cancer. But I'll just leave this one here, cause it's a classic:

Spoiler

Show

[Amazon]

Yes. They. Do.



No. I am talking about actual people with actual platforms. They exist. They are out there.



To you. Feminism isn't a monolith (for like....the 100th time). It doesn't have a dogma. It doesn't have a core set of beliefs. No Feminist is the same in all their opinions. Stop talking as if Feminism is just this one thing when it is demonstrably not.



Except I just pointed out at least three who do and the rabbit hole goes much further.

Oh yeah, one girl described as "The Femitheist is a 22-year-old criminology student with a three-year-old." can speak for the whole movement. One young girl who said a stupid thing on her college years is the mouthpiece for thousands of feminists, a girl who probably regretted saying this after she got more mature. Sure… That makes sense.

Is like someone posted "internet is evil and should be banned" but because he's a member of the giant in the playground forums that means ALL members agree with that. Not just… You know… A person.

So let me make it clear, “One person's opinion ≠ What a movement means”.

Before you say “Well, that’s what you do!” my opinions are based on a long history of writers and authors of the movements not “what I think”.

The second one has nothing to do with castration.

Oh yeah, because a joke on twitter totally summarizes what we believe, you got us! Oh dear D:

This just proves me right, some silly biased site post some news that take a small fact out of context and the people who read are influenced by it causing hatred, discrimination and misinformation about what feminism really is about.

Yes it does! Feminism is a school of philosophy with writers and authors.

No, you didn’t; And the sad part is that you think it does.

EDIT:

Spoiler: Off topic response

Show

As someone who was punched unconscious for as best as I can tell, because of the hat I wore whike being in San Francisco (to see a Rock Band),
, men are also repressed and asaulted for what they wear.

If feminism can make it so that women won't be assaulted for what they wear, maybe they will be some spillover and boys/men will be safer as well.

That’s not the same, they are both types violence, but the motivations are different, one is not motivated by gender the other is.

EDIT 2:

They do. They're the ones who jump out defending female teachers that are caught having sexual relations with their students, despite the fact that if the genders were reversed, they would be up in arms demanding the male teacher's head.
And here's the wage gap card.
And here's the "If I go around wearing revealing clothes, I don't want to get unwanted catcalls or men staring at me" card. Yet they also unironically wear hijabs on their heads because they think it's a symbol of female empowerment(it's not, I lived in Kuwait long enough to learn that). Oh, but if a man dares to have a hula girl on his cars' dashboard, that's cultural appropriation.
Remember the "DIE CIS SCUM" video? I know I do.
Remember the girl who said she was a "free inhabitant" that was arrested and cried "rape" when the officer put the cuffs on her? I know I do.
I could also fill this post with links to Ben Shapiro and Milo Yiannopolus videos discussing the matter, but that might get it flagged for being too political.
EDIT:
And here's the "microaggressions" card. Do you also get triggered by "mansplaining" and "manspreading"?

I never heard of a feminist defending a person accused of sexual assault incidents.

You know that just putting “card” in front of a legitimate issue won’t make it less relevant right?

I never saw a feminist wearing a hijab apart from the ones inserted in that cultural context, and if you actually bothered to read about their culture and learn about their faith you will see that the idea behind the hijab is actually quite progressive.

Again, that’s one person, it’s like saying all gamers are angry and have no self-control and link the angry German kid as “proof.”

I'm so tired of people who don't know what feminism is, keep talking as if they were expects despite the fact they don't really know anything, they are just echoing what some guy on the internet told them.

I could also fill this post with links to Ben Shapiro and Milo Yiannopolus videos discussing the matter, but that might get it flagged for being too political.

I rest my case.

[Dr.Samurai]

Amazon,

There is no "true feminist". Even feminists don't agree with other feminists on every issue. You have different ideas of what equality for women is and means, what's appropriate, what's inappropriate, etc. among the feminist movement. I'm sure some of them don't consider some of their peers to be true feminists.

This started with your response to Khyberwulf, so I'm curious... are you seriously suggesting that there is nothing to be criticized in modern day feminism? Because you took issue with him making an unfavorable comparison to feminism, and with the idea that anyone can make a comparison to feminism in a negative light. So are you really of the mind that there is nothing there to criticize? Nothing that can be done better? Because I'm typically most critical of the things I believe in and advocate for, and I don't know that I consider any of those things to be beyond reproach.

[Amazon]

Amazon,

There is no "true feminist". Even feminists don't agree with other feminists on every issue. You have different ideas of what equality for women is and means, what's appropriate, what's inappropriate, etc. among the feminist movement. I'm sure some of them don't consider some of their peers to be true feminists.

This started with your response to Khyberwulf, so I'm curious... are you seriously suggesting that there is nothing to be criticized in modern day feminism? Because you took issue with him making an unfavorable comparison to feminism, and with the idea that anyone can make a comparison to feminism in a negative light. So are you really of the mind that there is nothing there to criticize? Nothing that can be done better? Because I'm typically most critical of the things I believe in and advocate for, and I don't know that I consider any of those things to be beyond reproach.

Sure there are problems with the movement; none one is perfect, but still if you look at the big picture they are rather minor.

It's like when you are dying of dehydration, any water will do, any type of water even if it's kind of of dirty is better than no water.

[Razade]

Oh yeah, one girl described as "The Femitheist is a 22-year-old criminology student with a three-year-old." can speak for the whole movement. One young girl who said a stupid thing on her college years is the mouthpiece for thousands of feminists, a girl who probably regretted saying this after she got more mature. Sure… That makes sense.

You failed to understand, or are choosing to ignore, the point. Someone said that it's impossible to make someone look bad by agreeing with a feminist. That person is a feminist, agreeing with her best make you look bad.

Is like someone posted "internet is evil and should be banned" but because he's a member of the giant in the playground forums that means ALL members agree with that. Not just… You know… A person.

I never even began to state that because these people feel this way that all feminists agree with them. Quite the contrary actually. Actually the literal opposite of that.

So let me make it clear, “One person's opinion ≠ What a movement means”.

A movement is the people within it. It isn't just one person. Demonstrably not just one person.

Before you say “Well, that’s what you do!” my opinions are based on a long history of writers and authors of the movements not “what I think”.

They'll say the same thing about you. They do say the same thing about you.

The second one has nothing to do with castration.

Never said it did. Neither does the third.

Oh yeah, because a joke on twitter totally summarizes what we believe, you got us! Oh dear D:

There is no we. There is you. You're not Feminism. You're Amazon.

This just proves me right, some silly biased site post some news that take a small fact out of context and the people who read are influenced by it causing hatred, discrimination and misinformation about what feminism really is about.

Vice is a highly liberal news media site that champions equality in broad strokes. The Huffington Post is probably THE liberal news media. These are not biased news sites. These are not people taking anyone out of context. This is YOU attempting to muddle the narrative as best you can. This is you going "Yeah, those aren't MY feminists and I'M the only right one so I'm still right". Like I said. You can start lecturing us when you clean your own house. Sweeping them under the rug and acting like they don't exist certainly is one way of doing it but it's not the most honest way.

I don't have the solution to the burgeoning radical movement within the broader Feminist talking points. I don't need to have one. I don't identify as a feminist, I hold no truck with them. I have no desire to reform your school of thought. But you seem committed to the movement, so instead of bringing people who agree with you (like me) on how I'm wrong for pointing out the cancer that is eating your movement alive from the inside out maybe you should take some of your own advice and Listen and Believe.

Yes it does! Feminism is a school of philosophy with writers and authors.

No it doesn't. Philosophy isn't set by doctrine. There are competing philosophies of feminism. You know that though.

No, you didn’t; And the sad part is that you think it does.

That's just like, your opinion man.

I never heard of a feminist defending a person accused of sexual assault incidents.

So that means it's never happened!!

It's like when you are dying of dehydration, any water will do, any type of water even if it's kind of of dirty is better than no water.

I'm starting to see the full spectrum of you Amazon and it's honestly a little scary. Accept people who openly call for my death because of what I was born because it's better than a woman making a few less cents on the dollar?

[Amazon]

You failed to understand, or are choosing to ignore, the point. Someone said that it's impossible to make someone look bad by agreeing with a feminist. That person is a feminist, agreeing with her best make you look bad.

Was that the point? I'm sorry I didn't get that.

I never even began to state that because these people feel this way that all feminists agree with them. Quite the contrary actually. Actually the literal opposite of that.

Ok, good to know.

A movement is the people within it. It isn't just one person. Demonstrably not just one person.

Well, if that's what you believe, I'm fine with that. I don't agree, but I'm fine with that.

They'll say the same thing about you. They do say the same thing about you.

The ones you provide don't. The first one ever said she regretted saying it..

Never said it did. Neither does the third.

Since it was an answer to my "Feminists don't advocate for castration" comment I thought it was fair to assume it was.

There is no we. There is you. You're not Feminism. You're Amazon.

Ok, so you can say what am I or what I'm not better than me? Ok.

Vice is a highly liberal news media site that champions equality in broad strokes. The Huffington Post is probably THE liberal news media. These are not biased news sites. These are not people taking anyone out of context. This is YOU attempting to muddle the narrative as best you can. This is you going "Yeah, those aren't MY feminists and I'M the only right one so I'm still right". Like I said. You can start lecturing us when you clean your own house. Sweeping them under the rug and acting like they don't exist certainly is one way of doing it but it's not the most honest way.

It's like saying that suicidal Christian cults represent all Christian religions.

I don't have the solution to the burgeoning radical movement within the broader Feminist talking points. I don't need to have one. I don't identify as a feminist, I hold no truck with them. I have no desire to reform your school of thought. But you seem committed to the movement, so instead of bringing people who agree with you (like me) on how I'm wrong for pointing out the cancer that is eating your movement alive from the inside out maybe you should take some of your own advice and Listen and Believe.

Well, you seem to care a lot since this is not your first time you are talking about it.

No it doesn't. Philosophy isn't set by doctrine. There are competing philosophies of feminism. You know that though.

And that's good. The problem is that people think that just because people identify as feminist and say what "they think" they are saying what feminism thinks despite the fact that what they say has nothing to do with the academic feminism.

That's just like, your opinion man.

Indeed.

So that means it's never happened!!

No, but I don't have to take your world or the possibility of something existing, why don't you provide examples?

I'm starting to see the full spectrum of you Amazon and it's honestly a little scary. Accept people who openly call for my death because of what I was born because it's better than a woman making a few less cents on the dollar.

To be very blunt and sincere I don't care about what you think of me

[Razade]

Was that the point? I'm sorry I didn't get that.

Yes.

Well, if that's what you believe, I'm fine with that. I don't agree, but I'm fine with that.

Good for you.

The ones you provide don't. The first one ever said she regretted saying it..

She still believed it at one time. The fact that she's become less radical is good. She's far from the only one.

Since it was an answer to my "Feminists don't advocate for castration" comment I thought it was fair to assume it was.

Except...some do. So again, you're just factually wrong. The fact one of them dialed back doesn't mean she didn't in the past and that others don't currently advocate for it. Do you want me to provide more links? Of course you don't, even if I did you'll just explain them away without actually admitting you're wrong.

Ok, so you can say what am I or what I'm not better than me? Ok.

Not exactly. I'm saying you're not the whole of a philosophical movement. If that's a problem for you well....not much else to say really.

It's like saying that suicidal Christian cults represent all Christian religions.

No! NO! This isn't hard! Stop trying to say I'm saying something I'm not! Parts of a community don't represent all the community! They represent themselves. Just like you represent yourself. Not Feminism. Amazon is not Feminism. Amazon is a Feminist! Just like a Bass Hunter isn't Bass Hunting! Come on. This is logic 101.

Well, you seem to care a lot since this is not your first time you are talking about it.

I never said I didn't care.

And that's good. The problem is that people think that just because people identify as feminist and say what "they think" they are saying what feminism thinks despite the fact that what they say has nothing to do with the academic feminism.

Well that's...certainly a sentence. I've said it once, I'll continue to say it. I can't tell people they're feminist or not feminist. I can certainly tell people they aren't Feminism or any other ism. Because saying you represent an entire and divergent philosophy is absurd and me countering that with "that's nonsense" isn't inconsistant. Identify as what you want, but when you start talking as if you are the voice of a massive group of people...that should be challenged.

No, but I don't have to take your world or the possibility of something existing, why don't you provide examples?

Aside from the fact that posting links to examples wouldn't amount to much with you in light of when I actually bothered to source some examples and you literally said they don't count for one reason or another without even bothering to discuss them? Other than that? I think that's really the only reason I need. Examples mean nothing to you. There's no example I could give to demonstrate that what you claim doesn't exist exists.

To be very blunt and sincere I don't care about what you think of me

That's perfectly fine. You didn't answer the question. Are you advocating accepting radical and racist/sexist mentalities to progress your idealogy? Is that a line to cross in accomplishing your goals or am I taking your words too far? Are you fine with giving and allowing people who advocate for male castration (who you claim don't exist despite the evidence that they do) a platform to lessen the Earnings Gap? Are you fine taking away the rights to vote for all white men for better representation of females and people of color in the halls of power?

[S@tanicoaldo]

asfar as I know, there are many types of feminism with differents views, by what is aw form, your posts you seem to be a follower of Simone, she was a lot more liberal about straight sex than most of the other feminists who believe sex was bad and wrong.

Spoiler

Show

As you can see by this funny comic there is no ONE feminist but many views on how to deal with feminist issues.

I used to play D&D with socialists and feminists back at college, and I can assure you that this is an accurate representation of how playing with political people feels like. xD

[Razade]

Could you spoiler your art please? Nothing worse than a picture that stretches the page.

[S@tanicoaldo]

Wow someone must be fun at parties.

[Razade]

Wow someone must be fun at parties.

Seriously? Asking someone to politely but something that stretches the page and making your post hard to read somehow makes me a killjoy?

[2D8HP]

Wow someone must be fun at parties.

...somehow makes me a killjoy?

With respect madam and sir, I believe that I am the "Joe Bummer", "Bobby Bringdown", and "Billie Buzzkill" of the Playground, and I have decades of experience as a killjoy!

This seat is taken!

Now please excuse me while I watch "Johnny Got His Gun" again while I take notes on achieving maximum tear-jerking.

Good day.







I said good day!
Get your own sarcasm detector!

[Starwulf]

Wow someone must be fun at parties.

You're new-ish here(at least going by post count, going by your join date, I'm surprised you aren't already aware of this), so it's understandable you don't already know this, but it is considered the norm(and polite) to always spoiler large pictures to keep load times down on threads, especially for the mobile users. There was nothing rude in Razade asking you to spoiler it ^^.

[Cazero]

Are we playing Strawman?

I could go take a dive in Tumblr to find the cases about women getting a slap on the wrist for having sex with underage boys being celebrated, when I'm feeling like getting some cancer. But I'll just leave this one here, cause it's a classic:

Picking a extreme personal opinion (optional step : distorting it so it also appears to be insane) and equating it to what a much larger movement actualy wants or does. Yup, we're playing Strawman. Jack Chick would be proud.

Since I'm capable of feeling guilt, I'd rather be a victim of genocide than commiting slavery and rape on a daily basis. I'll have to side with feminism in the imminent War of the Sexes.

[2D8HP]

Are we playing Strawman?

'Tis the best game of all!

Spoiler: Off topic? responses

Show

When I was a kid in the 1970's and a youth in the 1980's, I heard about "Feminism",

Definition of Feminism by Merriam-Webster

...but I never heard anyone complain about "the feminist" until some professional loudmouths started to on AM radio in the 1990's, then in the 2000's, I started to read complaints about "the feminists" on the internet, which I just thought of as "The internet is a big place with a lot of weird in it", but this year I had a young man (only 40) who worked with me (until he was exiled to another building that the public doesn't enter), that would among other irritating utterances would complain about "the feminists".

I mostly interact with 50-something adults at work, so and I'm hardly current, but is this a now common practice among young adults?

If so I have another item to add to my list of ways the 21st Century annoys me!

Well, firstly, someone who is "only 40" has lived a majority of their life in the 20th century, not the 21st century. If you wanna complain about generations and/or time periods that annoy you, at least get your chronology right

As to the substance of your question, I'm not entirely sure. I work at a public university, and regularly interact with a range of people from 18 to 70 years old. I rarely, if ever, hear complaints about "the feminists" in person. Which could suggest it doesn't happen very often, or it could suggest that when it does happen, it isn't on a university campus. For example, it could be that it is somewhat common for non-college-educated young and middle-aged people to make the sort of complaints you are referring to, and that I simply don't hear them because there aren't many non-college-educated people working in a university. I've never worked outside academia, either, so I don't know if it's more or less common in the private sector.

In my experience the complaints about feminism are really only common on this Forum.

I mostly interact with 50-something adults at work, so and I'm hardly current, but is this a now common practice among young adults?

If so I have another item to add to my list of ways the 21st Century annoys me!

"Modern" (third-wave) feminism is pretty open about its hate for white straight men....

How have I managed to live 49 years of my life and never encounter this, if it's "pretty open"?

I heard of the "Women's Movement" in the 1970's from my mother and my teachers which worked for legal equality, but hardly anything since, certainly no somehow menacing "Third Wave", I really think that "anti-feminist" are mistaking a few voices on college campuses and the internet as, well really anything.

I look at the dictionary definition of "Feminism" and "Feminist" and I don't see anything to fear, and the acrimony seems ridiculous.

I'd it fear of women having power?

From my grandmother I heard tales of how women pretty much kept the country going while the men were overseas (she worked in the shipyards), the lasting effect?

They could now wear pants ar home and on weekends, then their daughters (my mothers generation) decided to undo some archaic laws.

Maybe a lot of this is young men discovering that, while boys (slightly) outnumber girls in Elementary school, among adults women outnumber men?

In any case, now that I've had my first co-worker (and co-worker is the closest I get to "friend") who's complained about "The Feminist's", they way I still stood working with him is to roll my eyes, sigh, and mock him, "Is that why you spend so much on bullets that you say you need to work more overtime for, because girls and women are going to do what exactly? If any actual female humans come to your trailer you let us know".

[Dr.Samurai]

Picking a extreme personal opinion (optional step : distorting it so it also appears to be insane) and equating it to what a much larger movement actualy wants or does. Yup, we're playing Strawman. Jack Chick would be proud.

I think you're confused Cazero.

Amazon was saying "Feminists don't do X" and Mikemical was saying "Yes they do". Xyril then asked for him to back up the assertion with examples of three feminists doing as he insisted. He provided a link with some examples, and posted one directly. There is no strawman here.

Spoiler: @2D8HP

Show

Respectfully, I think you're being unfair to your coworker. I don't know what his complaints are, but there are certainly things to complain about. It may be that he's just sexist and doesn't like the idea of equality, but I'm skeptical of that . Bear in mind, many *women* have a problem with modern day "third wave" feminism, and fewer and fewer women are identifying as "feminists" because of it.

If you say "feminism is simply about women being equal to men", of course you're going to scratch your head about anyone making complaints about that. Most people do not actively oppose equality between the sexes.

If people *are* complaining though, it's better to look a little deeper, than assume they're just sexists or worst. And, as I mentioned, it's hard to think "oh, guys are just complaining because they're stupid evil men" when there is significant push-back among women against feminism.

Given your comment that you've only seen complaints on this forum, I'm guessing you're just simply not exposed to this new culture war. But I can assure you this sentiment is not limited in any way to this forum; there is an anti-feminist movement. Really, there's just an entire anti-SJW movement.

It's all in how you do things. It's not enough to have good intentions.

[Cazero]

I think you're confused Cazero.

Amazon was saying "Feminists don't do X" and Mikemical was saying "Yes they do". Xyril then asked for him to back up the assertion with examples of three feminists doing as he insisted. He provided a link with some examples, and posted one directly. There is no strawman here.

If [movement] is actualy defined, examples of individual people is never going to be what [movement] is supposed to do. It doesn't matter how many you pick. They're still individual persons stating their personal extreme opinion that just happen to vaguely align with [movement]. Them being convinced to actualy be a part of [movement] is just one more delusional detail about their opinion.

When you replace [movement] with feminism, somehow there are people who believe it's not strawmaning. Try putting a nationality, political party or religion here. See what happens.

[2D8HP]

Spoiler: Response to Dr. Samurai

Show

Thank you for the conversation!

Spoiler: @2D8HP

Show

Respectfully, I think you're being unfair to your coworker....

....Given your comment that you've only seen complaints on this forum, I'm guessing you're just simply not exposed to this new culture war. But I can assure you this sentiment is not limited in any way to this forum; there is an anti-feminist movement. Really, there's just an entire anti-SJW movement.
.

Perhaps, but the O.P.'s description of the "annoying friend" reminded me quite a bit of my new, young (born in'76 so the second youngest on the crew), co-worker, and I regarded his mutterings about "feminists" as part of a package along with his loudly using the "N-word", and the "B-word", in public areas while being pale and male, and bellyaching about "illegals" (annoying in private and potentially job ending in public for me because someone could report on "those guys in Engineering".

I worked construction for ten years, and I definitely heard foul language (including odious racial slurs) but that was in places that were usually so loud one often couldn't really hear what anyone was saying a few feet away, but moaning about "feminists" was new to me.

Why would anyone think this is civil discourse in the hallways outside courtrooms?

Too much AM radio?

As far as the anti-feminist having a point, they were no personal anecdotes, and all the links were to YouTube videos, blogs, and "Vice", hardly the New York Times, or the Washington Post, and it was mostly about what happened to some overpriveledged kids at selective colleges, not about what happens in regular society.

Since I can clearly see my own day to day life, the idea that they're "SJW's" who are any kind of danger worthy of an "anti-SJW movement" is absurd. The only "culture war" that I've seen is instigated for radio ratings.

Based on my own life experiences (since I remember how the people who's fists were punching my face looked like) if there's an anti-anyone movement worthy of my support it would be against the bearded and stocky young men of the late 1980's and early 1990's who wore flannel shirts and backwards baseball caps (if you're not a welder, a cameraman, or a sniper why is your hat on backwards?). The worst incident was my getting punched unconscious by stangers after being picked out, and asked "What's happening" (I was waiting outside of Slims on 11th Street in San Francisco trying to see the Flaming Lips perform), definitely left me with a useful prejudice, as when another bearded, stocky, backwards cap, and plaid shirt wearing young man approached me (on Blake Street just off Telegraph Avenue) and demanded, "Give me your money!", I already had pepper spray in my hand. A decade latter, age and working construction in San Jose (and horrible "Silicon Valley") made me stocky as well (though I never grew a damn beard!), and one day a grossly overweight bearded plumber that I was the apprentice of told me a story of how in his youth he and friends went to San Francisco to go "queer bashing" only to be fought off and chased by the "queer" driving a VW bug (my father drove one, so that detail stuck) down the highway that they were trying to escape on, "he was really strong".

That's when it clicked for me. As a teenager I knew some classmates, and friends who were "out" but I thought of any trouble that they may have because of that as something that would have happened in "the bad old days", but I realized that since I:

1) Was wearing a Greek fisherman's hat (I remember getting it knocked off my head) instead of a backwards baseball cap,

2) I was skinny,

and

3) In San Francisco to see a Rock band.

I was selected as a "queer" (someone not wearing a backwards baseball cap) to be "bashed" (sucker-punched to unconsciousness).

That made me realize that LGBT etc, etc folks have real contemporary (OK I would have been at least 21 years old, but it was before I got married because I was alone so 1989 to 1992) violent repression against them.
All the horrible "jokes" that I've heard at work plus the fact that I've mostly lived among (and am married to) non-white folks taught me that they endure violence against them.

Having lived with a women for over two decades has shown me what they endure, but the violence directed against people who look like me? Always by someone who also looks like me except for a beard, and/or a shaved head, and those stupid backwards baseball caps!

If there really is:

hate for white straight men.

judging by how violently we treat others, and each other, no wonder!

Not all of us are violent thugs?

Then maybe the statements about "not all feminist" have equal merit, and the statement to

You can start lecturing us when you clean your own house.

applies to us "males, etc." as well (or is equally absurd, whichever)

Does that make me self-hating?

No I just don't like being punched, and I remember who was doing the punching and I'd be very surprised if they were "feminist", or "SJW'ers", I have no fear from that quarter, it's their opponents that I fear, as I was punched into becomming a supporter of "social justice" by being "queer-bashed" (my actual sexuality has little to do with it, as without that experience I could easily imagine myself being blase about justice no matter who I wanted to sleep with).

Since most of the complaints cited about "feminists" seem to be about stuff on college campuses, if I was a young, and sheltered privileged college boy, I could imagine myself being annoyed by "feminism" and "SJW's", but since I've lived 49 years outside of the academy, I have a different view of where danger lurks, and if there is a "culture war" (the actual existence of which I'm dubious of) I don't see the violence comming from feminists and their allies.

The co-worker that I mentioned chuckled with glee many times watching what he said were videos on his phone of "hippie protesters getting their asses kicked".

Perhaps because my parents were "hippie" protesters I didn't see the humor.

[Liquor Box]

If [movement] is actualy defined, examples of individual people is never going to be what [movement] is supposed to do. It doesn't matter how many you pick. They're still individual persons stating their personal extreme opinion that just happen to vaguely align with [movement]. Them being convinced to actualy be a part of [movement] is just one more delusional detail about their opinion.

When you replace [movement] with feminism, somehow there are people who believe it's not strawmaning. Try putting a nationality, political party or religion here. See what happens.

I completely agree with you - just because one person who is feminist has extreme and outrageous views it does not mean feminism itself (or all feminists) are extreme and outrageous, and it is not a valid counter to a more moderate feminist position*.

You would agree that the reverse is also true though? That just because sometimes the arguments of those that oppose a particular feminist position are extreme and outrageous it does not mean that opposition to a feminist position is itself (or all people who sometimes oppose feminist positions) are extreme and outrageous, and they would not be a valid counter to a more moderate argument against a feminist position?

Although, I'm not sure that anyone has said otherwise.

[Razade]

If [movement] is actualy defined, examples of individual people is never going to be what [movement] is supposed to do. It doesn't matter how many you pick. They're still individual persons stating their personal extreme opinion that just happen to vaguely align with [movement]. Them being convinced to actualy be a part of [movement] is just one more delusional detail about their opinion.

K.

If Feminism is actually defined*, examples of individual people is never going to be what Feminism is supposed to do. It doesn't matter how many you pick. They're still individual persons stating their personal extreme opinion that just happen to vaguely align with Feminism. Them being convinced to actually be a part of Feminism is just one more delusional detail about their opinion.

Just...so much to unpack here!!

1. No one is saying anyone speaks for the whole of a movement. Except for Amazon. She's the only one claiming to speak for what Feminism actually is.

2. You know what we call this? A No True Scotsman. Like, the proto-typical case of one. Person X isn't a Feminist because Person X doesn't meet the definition of Feminism as I define it.

3. This statement is...well frankly really insulting to people with mental health issues. They're not REALLY part of a movement, they're delusional and they're only part of that movement because their delusions coincide with what they think the movement says.

4. Amazon very clearly said Feminists don't do X. More than one person (myself included) then provided feminists who did in fact do what Amazon claimed they didn't. That isn't a Strawman. That's a refutation.

*Feminism has multiple definitions and since definitions don't matter, their usages do...I fail to see how "If something is defined as..." is a coherent argument in such a broad discussion. There are as many definitions of Feminism as there are Feminists.

[Dr.Samurai]

If [movement] is actualy defined, examples of individual people is never going to be what [movement] is supposed to do.

Cazero, I don't think anyone was arguing what it's "supposed to do". And I think using "supposed to do" actually weakens whatever point you're trying to make here.

It doesn't matter how many you pick. They're still individual persons stating their personal extreme opinion that just happen to vaguely align with [movement].

Okay.

1. What is feminism "supposed to do"? You're venturing down "no true scotsman" here. Because there are feminists that think feminism should do all types of stuff. If we're vague and say "make men and women equal", it's clear to see that there can be an number of differing opinions on how to do that, so who is the "real" feminist?

2. I don't think I agree with your sentiment. I mean... technically, sure, no number of people that dissent can change the "technical" definition or goal of feminism. But practically, they sure can. It's why in polls the largest reason that *women* don't identify as feminists is because they think it's too extreme. You'd sit here and say "Well, I mean, that's not real actual true feminism", and they'd say "Oh? The extremism I've heard has come from self-identified feminists." To which you'd, presumably, double down with "They are delusional and no true feminist."

3. Every "movement" is made up of individuals. You're always interacting with an individual, not a force or ideology. So, while I get the point you're trying to make, this is true of everything. You can dismiss any individual.

Them being convinced to actualy be a part of [movement] is just one more delusional detail about their opinion.

Right, so No True Scotsman?

When you replace [movement] with feminism, somehow there are people who believe it's not strawmaning. Try putting a nationality, political party or religion here. See what happens.

How about I just repeat the conversation so you can see again that there is no Strawman here, only a No True Scotsman.

By his logic, he agrees with feminists...

You truly think you can accuse someone of possibly agreeing with feminists and thereby make him look bad?

I'm so tired of people who don't know what feminism is, keep talking as if they were expects despite the fact they don't really know anything, they are just echoing what some guy on the internet told them.

So...a No True Scotsman argument.
...
Feminism isn't a monolith, you don't speak for every feminist. There are feminists who champion castrating all men on a national holiday and keeping their sperm for making kids, putting the now castrated men in a second class who work until they're dead. There are feminists who champion equality.

That's my point! They don't do that, people who say they do are doing the same thing people used to do with the Jews (They eat babies) and the Africans (Their religion is black magic).

This demonizing process is horrible and you are perpetuating it!

Feminism is about gender equality, we fight for women rights and not for men rights because men are not being oppressed and marginalized, but women are. That’s not the same as “they fight for girls to gain rights and remove the rights from the boys” no one does that.

I think some problems are caused by the word "feminism".
...
I think that is why you have such misunderstandings. One person will say "feminist" meaning one thing, and another will understand that word another way.

We fight for gender equality, and genders are not equal, women are disadvantaged relative to men, take the salaries for example or the right to wear what they want without fear of repression or assault.

A feminist does not hold a hatred of men and/or masculinity, that's a false notion created to discredit it and cause fear and hatred, it's a false notion, a stereotype, that holds no weight.

I think you are mistaken to make such a blanket statement about people who disagree with you conception of feminism.

Feminism isn't a monolith (for like....the 100th time). It doesn't have a dogma. It doesn't have a core set of beliefs. No Feminist is the same in all their opinions. Stop talking as if Feminism is just this one thing when it is demonstrably not.

They're the ones who jump out defending female teachers that are caught having sexual relations with their students, despite the fact that if the genders were reversed, they would be up in arms demanding the male teacher's head.

Okay, the assertion is made. Now evidence is demanded. It's actually pretty easy on your part--you're not making a claim about the hypocrisy of a movement in general. All you have claimed is that there exist multiple individuals who 1) calls him or herself a feminist 2) at some point, defended a female statutory rapist and 3) at some point, condemned male statutory rapists.

Here's a handy link that recopilates several case, and saves me the time from having to write down more.

I could go take a dive in Tumblr to find the cases about women getting a slap on the wrist for having sex with underage boys being celebrated, when I'm feeling like getting some cancer. But I'll just leave this one here, cause it's a classic:

Picking a extreme personal opinion (optional step : distorting it so it also appears to be insane) and equating it to what a much larger movement actualy wants or does. Yup, we're playing Strawman. Jack Chick would be proud.

[Lord Joeltion]

Well, I wasn't planning to respond to this thread, since I'm too late to say anything new to OP.

But it's funny, because this last discussion remembered me of a thing we have discussed me and my girlfriend just this morning. This is all about first hand experience, so you are free to take it as such. But I think it serves to depict something about this "Third Wave issue" some people think isn't real

Spoiler: Hint

Show

It is real. Some people are actively reluctant to identify themselves as Feminists, and most of the blame is because of "a few" extremists, who happen to find a much louder voice through internet than they would be in real life (yet sometimes find their way out in real life too). I mean, sure, it is not a "huge scale" anything; but it does exist. And I don't mean Reddit people. I'm referring to "extremists" that happen to own pages, forums, and worse... they have followers and fans of their "opinions". You can find them everywhere. Even people who appear on TV

Thing is, my girlfriend is by all practical purposes, a "feminist person". I don't think I would date her if she was an activist (nothing to do with the movement, but I don't think I would be happy living with a person who isn't entirely focused in her personal life/success) BUT I would probably wouldn't be in love with her if she didn't held feminist values as high as she does. Yet, since I ever known her, she is very reluctant to publicly identify as such. It's not because of fear, yeah, we live in a "patriarchal" country, but most people around us (and most people in general) accept feminism as something good. Specially her own life is very "left winged" if you want to say so.

The issue comes with the fact that, just as she and I know a lot of feminists (activists), and follow/read/watch/listen to a lot of artists/groups who define themselves as "feminists" (and neither of us follow them for that reason, it's just a "coincidence" - Protip: it isn't); we also had the misfortune to find and meet (as in "face to face") feminists holding very radical ideas. Sometimes even "dangerous". "Dangerous" in the sense that, even tho they aren't as bad ideas at their core, they pose a bigger danger than those blatantly obvious because... they aren't blatantly obvious rotten ideas. So even the best feminist in the world might fall prey for them. Which is worse in the long run.

Long story short, we can't identify with feminism, not because of prejudice. But because we regard those specific "radicals" as the philosophical cancer of the movement. Which is sad. I mean, in a perfect world, yeah, I would be dating a feminist, that would be the world Amazon and others have the luck to live in. But we don't live there.

We live in a world where Feminism is (like it has happened to many other movements in history at some point) used as a banner and refuge by people who don't hold feminists ideals, but a slightly different agenda. I don't know what their agenda is, it probably has to do with some mental/sociological issue, but I don't care about that. What we do care, me and my GF, is that Feminism is being spoiled with those people. It is hurting the movement, and their validity in front of non-feminist eyes. The way I see it, I concluded there are three kinds of people about the topic:

Group A: Radicals who uphold silly ideas, sometimes in a coherent/appealing way, and happen to define themselves as Feminists. They wouldn't be a real issue, if it weren't for the fact that media is giving them the space to advocate for terrible ideas and disguise them as "feminist values".

Group B: Feminists who uphold coherent ideas and most of the time gather themselves in a movement that is more than a century old. They may present their ideas in an unappealing way, and sometimes resort to unorthodox methods, but at their core, their values and purpose are all OK. Luckily, those are the more widespread so far, and the ones whose media gave them the most approval.

Group C: People who don't define themselves as feminists. That would be either people who support or give approval to the movement; as well as those who oppose them. Making a distinction isn't useful for my conclusion.

Our conclusion was that only Group B has the tools to remove Group A from existence. Group A is problematic, not only because they are giving reason for "anti-feminists" to exist, but because they are distorting the common idea of what feminism is really about. The same way people "vilify" a certain practice just because of a single practitioner, people may apply the same logic to feminism. And that is wrong. Because feminism is at its core a good movement. It shouldn't be misused or misrepresented by anyone.

But some people from Group B are either oblivious or blind (unknowingly or not) of Group A. Some would argue they are too isolated cases; some deny their existence altogether; some may support them even tho they know they are radicals, because of the "feminist" tag. But for the sole reason they aren't group C most of them are falling on a bias fallacy. Aware or not, they are not taking care of this problem. And I am of the belief that no problem disappears by being ignored. Yesterday I saw yet another video against one of those Radical practices in gaming. At least once or twice a month, I hear about a certain "feminist" ranting about something that isn't gender equality at all. Sometimes it's a case from the media, and sometimes it's first-hand experience.

Spoiler: Real First Hand Experience

Show

Heck, once my boss was "rejected" from a Feminist meeting because "he was a man" (that's literally the only argument they gave). I am talking about a real group of Feminists, with hierarchy and all. And political weight. And the work of my boss deals with defending human rights. I mean, if he wasn't allowed to be in for a gender reason... I wonder what their opinion of gender equality is. Of course my boss never asked to assist to a meeting again, but that only hurts THEM, not my boss. So their decision was actively counterproductive to Feminism as a whole!

But this is just all anecdotal, like I said. Hopefully Amazon and the rest get my point across. My advice isn't "clean your house first". Because, really, that's a silly statement
It would be rather, watch out who you hang out with. They might be not the kind of allies you want in your team. Educate them, or reject them, but please, don't overlook their behaviour. They won't simply go away.

That is all. I know, I have weird conversations with my significant other, but, hey, at least we enjoy em.

[Luz]

This whole idea of “I identify as” it's silly to me, you can't identify as a feminist, you either are or aren't.

I may say that I identify as a member of the orthodox church or with Taoism or even with Socratic philosophy, that doesn't mean I'm any of those things, I may enjoy it but that doesn't make me part of it.

The way I see you have to be engaged with it to be part of it, so people who participate of the protests, political militancy or contribute to the “Scientific literature” can call themselves feminists.

Just because you agree with the ideas that doesn't make you one, it's like if I said I'm a Surrealistic Artists because I agree with their ideas and I'm a fan of their work although I don't produce any kind of art.

Or saying that I'm a member of the Greenpeace just because I think nature should be protected.

[WarKitty]

This whole idea of “I identify as” it's silly to me, you can't identify as a feminist, you either are or aren't.

I may say that I identify as a member of the orthodox church or with Taoism or even with Socratic philosophy, that doesn't mean I'm any of those things, I may enjoy it but that doesn't make me part of it.

The way I see you have to be engaged with it to be part of it, so people who participate of the protests, political militancy or contribute to the “Scientific literature” can call themselves feminists.

Just because you agree with the ideas that doesn't make you one, it's like if I said I'm a Surrealistic Artists because I agree with their ideas and I'm a fan of their work although I don't produce any kind of art.

Or saying that I'm a member of the Greenpeace just because I think nature should be protected.

That's going to get sticky though. I probably can't get into too many details without getting into politics, but you also get issues where one person may call themselves a feminist, but may not accept some thing that other people who consider themselves feminists think is really important.

[Celestia]

I don't know. I'd ask my friends, but I don't have any.