But didn’t you equate those words with rape in your previous post? As for Jewbacca,
Do you think that maybe feminism has a PR problem?
Maybe you are one of the reasonable feminists. If I was a woman I would not want to associate myself with such a movement, perhaps sane women need to get together and start something new.
Not true. They follow WADA rules, and as you see Caster Semenya was told she/he has to take testosterone blocking drugs to compete against women. Testosterone blockers do not enhance performance, so there is no reason to ban them. There are also therapeutic use exemptions for various drugs that are normally banned.
Feminism is defined as “the advocacy of women’s rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes.”. Anybody who uses feminism as a method of elevating women ABOVE men and not AT their level has perverted the term, and is not a feminist. I understand that certain incels lurking on here are overflowing with glee at the idea of trans women shitting on women due to their heightened strength levels because it seems like poetic justice, but equality of sexes is about equality IN SPITE OF OUR DIFFERENCES. Women and men are different. Women aren’t asking men to bleed from their dicks once a month or give birth, and they’re not asking to physically compete with us. They just want their ideas and bodies to be treated with the same level of importance as we would assign our own. If a man wants to identify as a woman, fine. But if biological identity differs from psychological identity, then those people crossing over should realize that biological makeup determines winners in strength sports, not psychological makeup. Thus, it is up to trans athletes to have the self-awareness not to compete against biologically disadvantaged opponents.
No, I didn’t. I suggested that it would be ludicrous to do so - it was an analogy to what you’re doing with the word “feminist,” which is to associate the word with the worst things you can think of, and then suggest decent women should distance themselves from the word. Here it is:
I find the constant shifting of words in our culture dismaying. We have to struggle to remember what to call people with dwarfism, no one is sure whether “deaf” is acceptable, and so on. Is “brown people” more acceptable then “minority”? No one really knows. And this is what you’re suggesting I do with feminism, find a new word or “start something new” that’s more palatable to…well, to you, I guess. That some women behave in tasteless ways does not require my apology, that some feminists are angry and hate-filled also does not require my apology or my cringing away from a term that means what it means, period. I shouldn’t have to any more than you should have to apologize for being male.
The things he listed happened primarily in the past century.
But as far as I can see, there actually are feminists who believe that these things are associated with rape, such as the ones who publish names of male students as potential rapists. And this line of thought is being pushed by the media, with all their talk of “toxic masculinity” and Gilette commercials and such. Was your comment just a coincidence?
As far as distancing yourself from feminism, it’s like suggesting that the average Muslims should distance themselves from ISIS. It’s like the saying “fly with the crows, get shot with the crows”, by associating yourself with a particular group of people you become guilty by association or at least people will perceive you to be.
It’s not just me that has a problem with feminism. There are plenty of women who want nothing to do with it either. Maybe you look at feminism through rose-colored glasses, but to a lot of people it looks a bad scene.
Nobody is born a feminist, that is flawed logic. You can’t willingly join a group or movement and claim that the actions of other members don’t reflect on you. It’s like joining the Hells Angels because I like leather jackets and Harley Davidsons, then crying when I get labelled as a criminal. If you don’t want to be associated with the negative actions of a group then don’t join the group.
There is some talk about “incels” here, I have a wife and two kids so I am nowhere near being an incel but why should incels be maligned as a group? Very few men would voluntarily abstain from sex, and on top of that “incel” is short for involuntarily celibate so it’s not even by choice. Sure there are some miserable assholes and a few that went out and killed people, but why should that reflect on involuntarily celibate men as a whole?
No, “Muslim” is the equivalent to “feminism” here, where members identifying with the group identify as either religious in a certain way (Muslim) or as being for equal rights (feminism). ISIS distorts religion to pursue murder and enslavement, as Christianity has in the past and SOME anti-abortion protestors have more recently. However, I do not equate “Christianity” with wholesale murder, though there has been overlap, as I don’t equate “German” with genocidal politicians and military leaders, though there has been overlap. I don’t currently equate “British” with empire-seeking, though that is their history, because currently that does not seem to be their jam and I am capable of discriminating “then” from “now” and “some” from “all.”
No, my comment was a deliberate attempt to make you see that AS IT IS SILLY to suggest all men are responsible for the toxic acts of A FEW, so it is silly to suggest that ALL FEMINISTS believe men to be toxic. Also, when was @Jewbacca in his first year at Harvard? You have that and a razor commercial and I’m sure a few other random examples of silly people trying to un-boy boys? Please. I have millennium of men raping and enslaving women all over the world, and yet you don’t see me suggesting that in 2019 things aren’t pretty good for both sexes, and getting steadily better for women, who are now allowed to press charges for spousal rape, which became illegal in all 50 states only as recently as 1993. I am AGAINST drunk men coming home and brutally raping their already-beat-up wives. I am FOR such women being able to leave violent marriages and so appreciate the shelters, rape crisis lines, and stalking laws provided by the VAWA of 1994. I ALSO appreciate the laws being amended to offer abused men similar protections, as that was right and good to do.
I am NOT for the pulling of every single potentially disadvantaged human being under the umbrella of feminism to create a massive lobbying group, but as I believe these things tend to work themselves out, I simply wait.
ALL groups formed for the purpose of protest have their weirdos. The Christians were at one time treated like criminals (cf. Christ on the cross), and most of the offshoots of Papal Christianity began with a war. Do you think mainstream gay people, who simply want to live in peace, appreciate flaming gays waving giant penises in parades? No. Do you, as a men’s rights supporter, want to be lumped with angry, violent men? No, of course not.
It’s a pot/kettle thing. Surely you understand that?
I fully agree that should be the definition, but, in current public/political parlance, it does not.
Just for example, Sarah Palin should be considered a feminist under that definition, but she was repeatedly attacked as a “traitor” and whatnot – because of her views on abortion and generally disagreeing with special rights for women.
Same with the female Governor of Alabama.
Of course, this is not unique to feminists. I’ve been accused of being “antisemitic” – despite being a sabra Israeli, IDF veteran, Orthodox Jew, and descendant of two survivors of the Shoa (and two that got out of Dodge just in time) – because I don’t adhere to liberal orthodoxy.
So, yes, while the he-man-woman-hater-incels abuse the word “feminist” to attack women as harridans, it’s also used incorrectly by the radical feminists themselves to attack any woman who is not 100% on board with their radical agenda – by saying such women are not “feminist”.
It’s a bit of nightmare to a non-English-first-language person. I’m already self-conscious about my accent (I sound like Henry Kissenger), but I am now increasingly concerned I don’t use words in accordance with the definition-of-the-day.
Maybe that’s how you see it, but the way I see it is that you can be born female just like you can be born into a Muslim family. To voluntarily join a movement or organization is your own conscious decision.
Never heard of Merkel?
Then why does a “free” country like Canada still have the queen of England as their head of state? Former slave colonies in the Caribbean are now independent in name (and heavily in debt as a result) but she is still officially their queen.
My question is why would you want to be associated with such a group where the mainstream believes this? You are a “moderate feminist” and you don’t seem to have negative intentions, but with the current state of things it is you who is now on the fringes of this movement.
Then why would they go to the parade? That is the mainstream of the gay community. I have never heard of gays calling for modest behaviour, instead they want to flaunt their nastiness in public and teach kids in school about anal sex and gender theory.
Just curious, what did you do that resulted in these allegations? I have heard of people being called “self-hating Jews” for not conforming with mainstream Jewish ideas.
Simple analogies only work if the person you are talking to understands them. I don’t associate with gays and I don’t go to their parades so I know nothing about this. And I have never heard any gays asking other to tone down their perversions in public. It would make sense if they did because they are making themselves look absolutely disgusting, but this seems to be about forcing the rest of society to conform to their demands rather than anything else.
She answered her own question, what more do you want from me?
I wouldn’t categorize myself as a “men’s rights supporter”, mostly because the people calling themselves that are a bunch of clowns. Or at least the ones I have heard of. If anything, I’m just anti-feminist.
Just as a predicate to the discussion, I think “antisemitism” is the among the most widely misused label in current parlance – apparently up there with “feminist”. It is often used to incorrectly slur people who are not bigots, and people who really are bigots get a pass – generally due to the politics of the accuser.
But, as to your question, the most memorable (but least serious) was at a fancy-dress party, and I dressed in a Chewbacca outfit, bobby-pinned on a yarmulke, and put on an raggedy prayer shawl that was mine from like 6th grade. A SJW (not Jewish to my knowledge) lit into me for being a bigot, cultural appropriation, etc. She demanded I take off the yarmulke and shawl. I just stood there and looked menacing. (I’m not quite Peter Mayhew tall, but I’m darn tall.)
But more common (and more serious and not funny) is something along the lines of not me not condemning someone as antisemitic for merely being an asshole – Trump is the perfect example of this. His eldest children all married Jewish people; his clearly favorite daughter is an Orthodox Jew; and his grandkids are all Jewish. He is widely loved in Israel, so much so our last election was all about who was better buddies with Trump. I don’t think his kids could have possibly married like that if they grew up in an antisemitic family.
But, yeah, he’s a flaming asshole (regardless if you like his policies). And while antisemitic folk are generally a subset of assholes, not all assholes are antisemitic. (I probably need a Venn diagram to explain that one.)
Anyway, by going against the liberal orthodoxy of not calling Trump an antisemitic guy, I’ve been called “antisemitic”.