The NationStates Feminist Thread II

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Think Highfort pretty much nailed it right there.

Its like Communism, so many different sub types that often end up butting heads and have disagreeing views on different matters and aspects of the overall ideology.

As a moderate feminist, I do have issues and often butt heads with radical feminists.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Think Highfort pretty much nailed it right there.

Its like Communism, so many different sub types that often end up butting heads and have disagreeing views on different matters and aspects of the overall ideology.

I'd like to think it's not quite there yet. When a feminist hires someone to brain another feminist with a pickaxe, we'll be there.

Hehe

Think Highfort pretty much nailed it right there.

Its like Communism, so many different sub types that often end up butting heads and have disagreeing views on different matters and aspects of the overall ideology.

As a moderate feminist, I do have issues and often butt heads with radical feminists.

Ditto

[Ostroeuropa]

Keep in mind there isn't one definition of feminism. There's many sub-fields and organizations which interpret the concept of "advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men" in different ways.

Some consider feminism to be a field of social advocacy to be exclusively concerned with women's rights; others consider it a form of egalitarianism where gender equality must be achieved for women to be politically, socially, and economically equal to men.

Some consider men to be a problem, others see them as perpetuating the issue, and yet others consider them victims of a gendered system that has been supported by men and women alike.

The spectra of beliefs in feminism is so wide that it's reaching its limit and tearing at the seams. You have conservative feminists, liberal feminists, radical feminists, socialist feminists, egalitarian feminists, and many of these groups are not only fighting different battles but may even be fighting each other (as evidenced by some of the arguments between feminists on this very thread).

And when taken as a whole it has serious and irreconcilable problems. Feminism when taken as a whole is not and has not been egalitarian, it does not deserve absolution for those faults based on the merits of one or more subtypes that have had no noticeable effect.

This. In addition, those subtypes often fall afoul of the feminist impulse I outlined earlier, or utilize rhetoric or statistics from misandrist strains of feminism and as a result are themselves a problem.
Further, the mere identification as a feminist causes a chilling effect that prevents discussion of gender issues from an honest perspective due to the level of abuse of power that holders of the term have engaged in.

It's my opinion that identifying as a feminist demonstrates you aren't interested in gender equality, since you're actively doing something that prevents it being achieved. (Stifling discussion through implied threats against men who disagree with you.)

Whether or not you think calling yourself a feminist should mean that, that is what it means to a lot of people. Identification as a feminist has nothing but downsides, and i've yet to hear any justification for it that didn't pretend the movement was positive.

Think Highfort pretty much nailed it right there.

Its like Communism, so many different sub types that often end up butting heads and have disagreeing views on different matters and aspects of the overall ideology.

As a moderate feminist, I do have issues and often butt heads with radical feminists.

Ditto

I don't get why you'd identify as something that stifles discussion.

Not only that, it prevents you from being an adequate advocate for mens issues as many in the MRM will explain to you.

Firstly, because men will often not tell you their opinion on gender issues and will just parrot back what they think you want to hear to avoid you abusing them and trying to ruin their lives if you happen to be one of the psycho ones.

Secondly, because many victimized men will immediately write you off as a bigot for identifying with the movement that entrenched their victimization and refuse to talk to you about it in case you are a psycho, or because they have no interest in explaining to you why calling yourself a Nigger Lover is a bad idea when you seem to refuse to understand it. ("Not everyone who says Nigger is an oppressive asshole! Never mind the most influential and pervasive users of the term!") Or because they have no interest in lending any credibility or legitimacy to the term which has been used in order to deflect criticism of misandry and oppress men.

Thirdly, because identification as a feminist or engaging in an organization with a feminist label naturally attracts misandry over time as less egalitarian feminists arrive, especially those who refuse to jettison pieces of feminist dogma about mens issues and will actively stifle discussion on them that doesn't take place from a feminist perspective.

Fourthly, because of pervasive perceptions in our culture that feminism is a womans thing, making men far less likely to turn up to your meetings or give a shit about your advocacy.

Fifth, but not final, because it ignores the intellectual roots of the egalitarian strain of feminism in the mens rights movement. I have never met a feminist who wasn't either a useless fuck up or actively sexist when it comes to mens issues, unless that feminist has been in extensive contact with MRAs. (Or, mildly better, explicitly doesn't think feminism is supposed to deal with mens issues at all.) Nan, as an example, previously repeated some nonsense she heard about rape stats and had to be corrected on it. Where do you think those corrections stem from? It sure as fuck isn't the feminist movement.
Nan is only a decent feminist in as far as she is also an MRA. She might be in denial over that, i'm not sure though. The point being, not identifying as an MRA is appropriating their activism, arguments, and research into the feminist movement, despite much of it being explicitly anti-feminist or feminist-critical, in order to pretend feminism isn't a hate movement. This in itself, makes identifying as a feminist while using MRA talking points a sexist act, unless you also identify as an MRA.

So basically, you expect me to take you seriously as an equality advocate when you are quite plainly doing something that cripples your ability to do that as well as is a sexist act in itself. Why should I? Why should anyone? I'm of the opinion that identifying as a feminist means you don't really deserve a seat at the discussion, unless, as I previously mentioned, you are also an MRA. By doing so, you've demonstrated you care less about gender equality than you do about the feminist movement, and clearly don't care about making men feel welcome in the discussion enough to stop calling yourself a Nigger Lover.

[The Huskar Social Union]

No it wont stifle discussion because i identify as both, (shocker i know, clearly im mad) and ive had plenty of decent discussions about mens and women's issues in real life with people in University and online, both men and women, and both MRA's, Feminists and people who dont call themselves either.

So you can say that i am not in favour of gender equality because i call myself a feminist, and you would be wrong. And to be frank, i dont really give a fuck if you take me seriously or not, i stopped taking you seriously a long time ago due to your overly hostile tangents and near sweeping remarks towards people. So there, go on another rant at me for all i care, which i dont.

Also "Dont care about making men feel welcome" fucking get over yourself, you dont know me, dont act like you do.

[Ostroeuropa]

No it wont stifle discussion because i identify as both, (shocker i know, clearly im mad) and ive had plenty of decent discussions about mens and women's issues in real life with people in University and online, both men and women, and both MRA's, Feminists and people who dont call themselves either.

So you can say that i am not in favour of gender equality because i call myself a feminist, and you would be wrong. And to be frank, i dont really give a fuck if you take me seriously or not, i stopped taking you seriously a long time ago due to your overly hostile tangents and near sweeping remarks towards people. So there, go on another rant at me for all i care, which i dont.

Also "Dont care about making men feel welcome" fucking get over yourself, you dont know me, dont act like you do.

I already said it's fine if you identify as both. *shrug* So I don't understand your problem. Is it that i'm calling out people who won't identify as an MRA? Why?

Also:
Another feminist hate mob strikes in spain:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/com ... _violence/

Along with the hashtag #7NFeminista, last Saturday more than 400 feminists associations have organized a march against "machista terrorism" [sic] to oppose "male chauvinism violences" [sic] in Madrid, Spanish capital city.
So you can get an idea of what were going on there, here are a few of the slogans they used (they're a bit hard to translate, but I think you can got an idea):
we are sick to the pussy of so many balls
were are going to burn down the Episcopal Conference
machos to the machete
man, moron, your mouth into the curb (in case you're missing it, is a reference to a famous scene of the film American Story X [NSFW!])
You are reading well: those slogans weren't against male batterers specifically, but against men as a whole. But that's not all. On the other hand, another group (which AFAIK comprised a local association for "gender violence victims", a conservative party and several unaffiliated people) were carrying some banners with messages for equity:
neither male chauvinism nor feminism
violence has no gender
more education in moral standing and less education in gender
They claim that upon seeing those banners, several women and men alike assaulted them. They were called "whores", "daughters of a bitch", "trophy wives"... in the comments section of a (liberal biased) source one woman mentions that they wished her to be one "in next year list of killed women", and soon they started to grab them to put down the banners and chase them out of there. Some policemen had to intercede in their favor, though they finally warned them that they wouldn't be able to protect them for long.
And so, that's how a march to oppose violence against women becomes a march for violence against everybody. Stay classy, feminists.

Oh, but it's a minority obviously.

This is typical of their MO in countries where they haven't managed to hijack the state to engage in their violence for them. The bomb threats against pizzey and such.

This is the movements history here, but it's currently happening there. If we took their institutional power away from them, I have no doubt that we'd see them revert to type.

This time we should just imprison them though instead of giving in to their demands.

Why "moderate" people identify with this movement is, once again, beyond me. But you're welcome to do so, and I'll even accept you as an equality advocate if they do as you do and identify as an MRA also.

You think i'm overly hostile to a terroristic and hate filled movement that actively abuses state power to discriminate on a massive scale?
Well ok, if you say so.

By the way, this continues the trend of the feminist movement managing to engage in more acts of violence and illegal activity in a given month/year than the MRM is even falsely accused of. So far, zero confirmed acts of violence by an MRA.

[Wallenburg]

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

[Valystria]

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

It's not that there a number of powerful feminists like that. It's that the movement for all intents and purposes is dominated by feminists against equality. It's been that way for decades. It's an inequality movement.

[Ostroeuropa]

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

Why shouldn't I judge a movement by it's accomplishments? And as that incident just demonstrated, it's not merely the ones in positions in power.
It's a large portion of the rank and file.

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

It's not that there a number of powerful feminists like that. It's that the movement for all intents and purposes is dominated by feminists against equality. It's been that way for decades. It's an inequality movement.

Ohai.

[Fartsniffage]

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

Why shouldn't I judge a movement by it's accomplishments? And as that incident just demonstrated, it's not merely the ones in positions in power.
It's a large portion of the rank and file.

It's not that there a number of powerful feminists like that. It's that the movement for all intents and purposes is dominated by feminists against equality. It's been that way for decades. It's an inequality movement.

Ohai.

You quoted a post showing 400 feminists in Spain. Is that a majority of feminist in Spain? In Madrid even? Back up your rhetoric.....

[Ostroeuropa]

Why shouldn't I judge a movement by it's accomplishments? And as that incident just demonstrated, it's not merely the ones in positions in power.
It's a large portion of the rank and file.



Ohai.

You quoted a post showing 400 feminists in Spain. Is that a majority of feminist in Spain? In Madrid even? Back up your rhetoric.....

400 feminist organizations in spain. Huge, huge difference. Notably, the pro-gender equality faction of the march didn't have a single feminist organization.

So don't give me something about how moderate feminists oppose these radicals too. Their opposition is as ethereal there, as it is here.

[Fartsniffage]

You quoted a post showing 400 feminists in Spain. Is that a majority of feminist in Spain? In Madrid even? Back up your rhetoric.....

400 feminist organizations in spain. Huge, huge difference.

Ah, fair enough. I misread.

[Ostroeuropa]

400 feminist organizations in spain. Huge, huge difference.

Ah, fair enough. I misread.

No problem, I initially had the same misreading.

[Fartsniffage]

Ah, fair enough. I misread.

No problem, I initially had the same misreading.

How many actually showed up to the protest?

[Ostroeuropa]

No problem, I initially had the same misreading.

How many actually showed up to the protest?

Thousands apparently, though it also has the endorsement of all main political parties except the Conservatives, who back the not-a-hate-group march. It received 100,000 euros in government subsidy.

[Fartsniffage]

How many actually showed up to the protest?

Thousands apparently, though it also has the endorsement of all main political parties except the Conservatives, who back the not-a-hate-group march. It received 100,000 euros in government subsidy.

Like 3 thousand or 600 thousand? It's a big difference......

[Ostroeuropa]

Thousands apparently, though it also has the endorsement of all main political parties except the Conservatives, who back the not-a-hate-group march. It received 100,000 euros in government subsidy.

Like 3 thousand or 600 thousand? It's a big difference......

I've found reference to tens of thousands in Russia Today and the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34756378

[Cat Rangoon]

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

I don't get why he keeps trying to make anyone conform to his definitions. Other than him using some sort of reverse rhetorical device. I frankly don't care about his points nor do I pay much attention anymore. It's just more Ostro yapping. I see no issue with my ideological stance. I am a feminist. If Ostro doesn't like it, I couldn't care less. *shrug*

Nana here.

[Wallenburg]

Ostro, just stop trying to cram your definition of feminism down everyone's throats. Some of us call ourselves feminists, some of us do not. Some of us are egalitarians, some of us are misandrists, some of us are misogynists. Just because there are a number of powerful, hypocritical feminists doesn't make the entire movement like that. You need to stop pretending that people can't identify as feminist and as egalitarian at the same time.

I don't get why he keeps trying to make anyone conform to his definitions. Other than him using some sort of reverse rhetorical device. I frankly don't care about his points nor do I pay much attention anymore. It's just more Ostro yapping. I see no issue with my ideological stance. I am a feminist. If Ostro doesn't like it, I couldn't care less. *shrug*

Nana here.

Indeed. People can identify however the fuck they want.

[Highfort]

I don't get why he keeps trying to make anyone conform to his definitions. Other than him using some sort of reverse rhetorical device. I frankly don't care about his points nor do I pay much attention anymore. It's just more Ostro yapping. I see no issue with my ideological stance. I am a feminist. If Ostro doesn't like it, I couldn't care less. *shrug*

Nana here.

Indeed. People can identify however the fuck they want.

To play Devil's advocate:

No one would support someone identifying as a Nazi "but without all that Jew-hating stuff" or support identifying as a fascist "but without all that xenophobia and nationalism". It defeats the purpose of the terms.

So assuming that Ostro has a set meaning for these terms and believes we should use it, if you don't identify the way the term is defined then using the term to define yourself is useless in his eyes.

It would be like if I said I supported social conservatism but didn't believe in traditional marriage, punishing criminals, gun ownership, or gender roles. What good does using a label that doesn't match me then do?

[Wallenburg]

Indeed. People can identify however the fuck they want.

To play Devil's advocate:

No one would support someone identifying as a Nazi "but without all that Jew-hating stuff" or support identifying as a fascist "but without all that xenophobia and nationalism". It defeats the purpose of the terms.

So assuming that Ostro has a set meaning for these terms and believes we should use it, if you don't identify the way the term is defined then using the term to define yourself is useless in his eyes.

It would be like if I said I supported social conservatism but didn't believe in traditional marriage, punishing criminals, gun ownership, or gender roles. What good does using a label that doesn't match me then do?

Well, you would be silly to do so, but nobody should try to force you to change how you identify. On top of that. However, those examples do not work well as an analogy to feminism, considering that Ostro's problems with feminism lie in the movement itself and not the idea that the word "feminism" definitively describes.

[Ostroeuropa]

To play Devil's advocate:

No one would support someone identifying as a Nazi "but without all that Jew-hating stuff" or support identifying as a fascist "but without all that xenophobia and nationalism". It defeats the purpose of the terms.

So assuming that Ostro has a set meaning for these terms and believes we should use it, if you don't identify the way the term is defined then using the term to define yourself is useless in his eyes.

It would be like if I said I supported social conservatism but didn't believe in traditional marriage, punishing criminals, gun ownership, or gender roles. What good does using a label that doesn't match me then do?

Well, you would be silly to do so, but nobody should try to force you to change how you identify. On top of that. However, those examples do not work well as an analogy to feminism, considering that Ostro's problems with feminism lie in the movement itself and not the idea that the word "feminism" definitively describes.

I would argue feminism definitively describes the movement and it's actions though, and attempts to divorce it from the movement and it's actions amount to whitewashing the term.

[Wallenburg]

Well, you would be silly to do so, but nobody should try to force you to change how you identify. On top of that. However, those examples do not work well as an analogy to feminism, considering that Ostro's problems with feminism lie in the movement itself and not the idea that the word "feminism" definitively describes.

I would argue feminism definitively describes the movement and it's actions though, and attempts to divorce it from the movement and it's actions amount to whitewashing the term.

I think you need a refresher on what "feminism" means.

[Ostroeuropa]

I would argue feminism definitively describes the movement and it's actions though, and attempts to divorce it from the movement and it's actions amount to whitewashing the term.

I think you need a refresher on what "feminism" means.

As i've said, I think that this amounts to whitewashing the term.
In addition, the Oxford definition better suits the movement.

Though the merriam-webster is very suggestive.

: the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities

: organized activity in support of women's rights and interests

This implies a further unspoken aspect of the definition, that men do not require organized activity and support of their rights and interests in order to achieve the aforementioned equality, which lines up perfectly with institutionalized feminism and it's assertions on the nature of sexism.
It does however leave open the opportunity to identify as both feminist and MRA to escape the problem.

Oxford defines it as activism for women on the GROUNDS of equality, which is entirely true, but doesn't make it an equality movement, merely one using equality rhetoric.

But beyond that, you're ignoring what I just said to you.
I view attempts to pretend that feminism means an equality movement to be whitewashing the word of it's historical context and meaning. That isn't how the word has been used, it isn't what it means to most people, and it isn't the most relevant usage politically.
It is entirely divorced from the behavior of the movement, UNLESS you take my interpretations above.

(I.E, the implied further step of the definition that endorses gynocentric conceptions of sexism, or the admittance that they merely use equality as an argument, not a goal.).

Merriam-Webster leaves open the opportunity to identify as a feminist and an MRA while still being egalitarian, but otherwise that simply isn't possible. When someone identifies as a feminist without also identifying as an MRA, what they are actually saying is that they don't think mens problems need organized activism to achieve equality. That's if you take the merriam-webster dictionary definition, OR the oxford one, which as I said, is divorced from the movement and it's history.

So you cherry picked a definition, and it STILL fucking supports my point, even though you tried to ignore the point i'm making.

Feminism simply does not mean what you seem to think it does, though i'll point out, the fact you also identify as an MRA means you're avoiding the pitfall I outlined above.

[Nordonovik]

I would argue feminism definitively describes the movement and it's actions though, and attempts to divorce it from the movement and it's actions amount to whitewashing the term.

I think you need a refresher on what "feminism" means.

The Quintessential Modern Feminist: Living alone in a dingy, pungent smelling apartment who's air is reminiscent of mustard gas due to all of the cats she's collected, unwashed dildos of varying color and size scattered about here and there along with the piles of crumpled up fast food bags and empty soda cans that fill this bloated, bitter creature's tomb.

[Highfort]

I think you need a refresher on what "feminism" means.

The Quintessential Modern Feminist: Living alone in a dingy, pungent smelling apartment who's air is reminiscent of mustard gas due to all of the cats she's collected, unwashed dildos of varying color and size scattered about here and there along with the piles of crumpled up fast food bags and empty soda cans that fill this bloated, bitter creature's tomb.

This is a very productive offering to the conversation.