Feminism: Enough is ENOUGH

Post Reply New Topic

I think a big problem with our culture is we take the worst extreme of any social justice issue and try to present it as representing the entire culture. I doubt even 99% of feminists hold the views shared in this article, or even hold views half as extreme as the ones posted. This has been true of internet culture for years, even back in 2005 when autism on the internet was.. what it was (those who know, know ) among many other harmful stereotypes. Most mature feminists will tell you this is far from feminism, in the same light most mature christians will separate themselves from the westboro baptist church, or how muslims will adamently say they're not at all like ISIS, it's all the same.. we take the most extreme and harsh view on a social issue and try to make it the poster child of the entire culture.

QFT!

That is also exactly how the rampant overly sensitive PC culture has taken such a deathgrip hold on this country. The most extreme is always more interesting than the middle of the road majority, but because the most extreme is a minority and minorities are always so much nobler than majorities in the minds of the loudest, it's the smallest extreme minority opinion that we must target as our goal to please. Just like eventually in schools the tests will be geared toward the child with the least ability to do the work, our thoughts and opinions must fall in line with the most extreme and most sensitive and most fearful. It's considered uncaring and cold to disregard extreme sensitivity or fear when it's actually one of the smallest factions in our society, but it's now turning into the shrill whine that will forever be considered the voice of this next generation.

That would be me.

I have done such denunciations when I've encountered what looks from my un-twittered, middle aged perspective as some sort of peculiar outlier. As have my Muslim friends when commenting on ISIS. Unfortunately, these denunciations wind up sounding like "no true Scotsman" . But I will continue. Us moderates (in any group) must persevere to make our moderate voices heard.

I would have denounced here too since sex selective abortion is abhorrent to me. But the story just sounded all kinds of "off". For starters, in my neck of the woods (and probably also in your neck of the woods) feminist moms and moms-to-be tend to be paired with pacifist/peace activist men. The most pressing concern is not bringing another ghastly,beastly boy into the world but rather that the culture at large will subvert their attempts to raise him their way. This usually manifests as a "no violent toys" rule. The crisis happens when the boy wants a toy gun or other violent toy (toy soldiers, toy tank or whatever). The problem isn't his maleness but that he is not inherently a peace activist as his dad almost always is. I am going to go out on a limb and guess that at some point you have gotten into discussions with such people trying to tell them that these toys won't turn their sons into stone cold killers. That is the usual feminist concern; "how do I raise this boy to be gentle and peaceful in a violent culture?" not "OMG ew a boy!".

But I understand that not everybody fits into neat demographic boxes. Just because I know these people doesn't mean that every pregnant feminist fits the pattern. There could be a "no boys!! !" pregnant feminist who got a sex selective abortion. But the outlier qualities pile up. I'm going to go with demographics again but in my experience, women with cold pragmatism are unlikely to respond with...

...that sort of strong emotional (hysterical) response would just bring disgust to such women. But hey, maybe she's even more of an outlier and this really was a pure emotional rather than pragmatic reaction and she has sex with men she generically hates and then has a hysterical reaction to the consequences. It's possible.

But then there's this GIGANTIC outlier which Snopes also pointed out.



She was at 20 weeks and got an abortion. That's not common. I had a gut feeling it was rare and went to the CDC for stats on abortion gestation stages.
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6108a1.htm



Since she was at 20 weeks, that puts her close to the 1.3% outlier mark although possibly in the 7% (but still an outlier) mark. And "without a hitch?" At the 20 week mark, it's a pretty major thing. My only personal experience with abortion was in highschool as I held a friend's hand and said soothing "it's almost over" words while she had her abortion at Planned Parenthood. She was crying inconsolably the whole time and having only missed one period was likely at 6 or 7 weeks (in the 64% group). She was also a teenage girl (as was I) which would add to the emotionality so I shouldn't overgeneralize. But "without a hitch"? That sounds like someone who has not only never had an abortion but never seen one, let alone a late term one. Watching my friend's abortion (from my angle I could see everything) made me double down on contraception so I never had one of my own. So that was a hoax flag of such ginormous proportions as to send me to Snopes, who handily debunked it as very effective clickbait.

But if it were real, I would denounce it.

Convention seems to be using something like "LGBQ+". A tongue-in-cheek alternative is QUILTBAG.

I'll give you the same tip I did in another thread - add genius.com/ before the link for a debunking of the craziest bits (mostly written by me). It is by far the most ridiculous article I've seen from them. (Though weirdly, the author's other stuff seems to largely be sensible - no need to read the whole thing, but she tells people that relying on one friend for support following an incident of sexual violence risks burning that friend out, which contradicts her call for all white people to actively put themselves at risk in order to fight any act of violence against a POC anywhere in the world or live with their racism)

The main problem with Everyday Feminism is that their editorial standards are too damn low. One week they're publishing an article about how important it is that non-academics should be able to access feminism and jargon should be minimised, the next, they publish something absolutely laden with jargon. One week they're pointing out that "hate crime" laws would, just like most legislation, disproportionately target minorities and would add to the PIC; the next, they're advocating for stronger legal protection against violence for women.

POC comes from anti-racism activists of colour; coloured has a lot of historical baggage and has usually been derogatory. To my mind, the intention is more important than the exact words (which is why I thought the outrage over the Hansen and Cumberbatch incidents was totally unnecessary - both were making anti-racist statements), but it seems quite a few POC are more comfortable with "of color" for historical reasons. I imagine most don't see much difference...

Parallels with "queer" I guess, most young LGBTQ+ people don't mind it, but some older people remember it as a slur.

You perfectly well DO get the distinction…you and I both do! But, hey, I'm sitting in the choir. Heck, I play piano for the choir (literally).

Good stuff btw, and I appreciate your post. I admit to being extremely naive when it comes to this kind of thing. I understand the frustration of some, particularly a certain "type" of man who gets bent out of shape because of how they constantly get ripped apart by feminists simply for expressing bewilderment over their difficulties with the opposite sex. I couldn't figure out how to respond to that kind of thing, and I remember reading one of your posts about feminists acting as an echo chamber. Being the village idiot that I can be sometimes, that had never occurred to me. So when it comes to L&D discussions, as opposed to PPR, I always ask why it is a certain type of man feels so compelled to dialogue or defend himself to Feminists™. Why is there such a need to impress these women? Maybe I just don't hate myself enough to understand it yet, I dunno… Every now and then I'll get into these discussions for my personal amusement, but I have no actual expectations of getting anywhere with it.

More relevant--I'm amused to see the terms "straw feminism" and "real feminism" being thrown around in this thread along with classic "No True Scotsman" rhetoric. Beautiful stuff.

From a parenting perspective, this IS something very possible to accomplish if parents decide to do it. The problem, and why such parents will always face this, is that to "mold a child in your image" one MUST be a strict disciplinarian and have complete control over everything children are exposed to, and every even slightly aberrant behavior must be corrected.

I do this through music. It's just my thing. My oldest son can listen to you play guitar and tell you what chords you're playing, and he doesn't have the first clue how to play guitar. I didn't teach him to do that. He was born, apparently, with the ability to hear and recognize musical tones and rigorous training at the keyboard brought that out at a comparatively early age. And while all of this is wonderful, it has come at the cost of a peaceful and stress-free home life. I believe it has been worth it. Not many parents will agree, and I accept that.

Another case in point: My daughter, who is in kindergarten, somehow got into the HABIT of lying, which also had a tie-in with her misbehavior at school. It was most unpleasant, I hate doing this kind of thing and avoid it as much as possible, but I quite firmly corrected her. We're still working on the misbehaving at school, we do prefer less severe discipline as appropriate, but the results have VASTLY improved over the last month, and the "fibbing" has come FULL STOP. Came to a full stop almost immediately, in fact. Peace/love/time-outs style parents can't get the same results this fast because those methods are at odds with their ideology.

Now, parents who chronically terrorize their kids so much that kids become immune to getting beaten half the death for spilling a cup of juice are far less effective than hippy-style parenting. Our style has gone through stages--DEMANDING respect through fear of consequences, commanding respect by our own actions being consistent with the values we teach our children, and earning respect by showing our children we love them. This demands a lot of parental involvement and a lot of sacrifice. Hippy parents are often quite good at this at later stages of the game, but the best ones are always the ones who come beside their kids and guide them through life, model their ideals, and walk the kids through the process.

Personally, I feel no guilt whatsoever in instilling fear in children at an early age. It makes a lot of things a lot easier. Our general approach has been that kids are less likely to fall into patterns of misbehavior if they are only kept within positive patterns of good behavior, i.e. they don't misbehave because they don't know how. No parent is perfect, we overlook things. Our daughter's lying caught us completely off guard because we weren't used to having problems. We gave her the benefit of the doubt at first. Once we figured out she was doing this deliberately, we let her start digging her hole. We let her see just how far down she'd dug herself, and we reminded her that we DO pay attention and things like this don't go unnoticed, at least no for very long. So now she probably thinks we really do have eyes in the back of our heads. We think she's seen other kids at school get away with it and maybe someone at school coached her as to what to say to us. We politely explained to her that OTHER parents don't supervise their kids that closely, probably don't even care, and very likely don't think there's anything they could or should do about it, anyway. We spend more time helping our kids understand adult incompetence and how to put up with other problem kids than we do correcting THEIR behavior, because now our kids SEE the patterns and steer clear of it.

The kind of parent who wants to raise peacenik kids will have to accept that you cannot adopt peacenik methods if you want to accomplish this. It will work with SOME kids, but you have to establish the desired behavior patterns EARLY. You can be a monster dad or monster mom to kids from, say, 18 months to 4 years--while they're still forgiving. After that, not so much. You have to be sure they understand why they're being punished or put in time-out. Peace, love, and no guns works after that age if you've done the foundational work so they keep themselves out of danger and from harming other people. If your ideology is at odds with that, you're going to have a lot of difficulty getting those kinds of results.

Im sorry but anyone who thinks all males are rapists at birth are whack jobs not to mention hypocritical bigots. I suppose you support ideologies such as this as well? https://witchwind.wordpress.com/2013/12 ... s-rape-ok/

First off, do you not understand what the word probably means? I was not making a definitive claim that feminists actively engage in sex-selective abortion against boys, but given the attitudes of so-called "radical feminists" who actively promote sex based separatism it is a possibility that cannot be completely ruled out. There was a pamphlet distributed by feminists to women at the occupy movement encampments back in 2011, the lower right corner reads as follows:

Intellectual freedom.
Women - only space would be respected and free from male - centrism in all its forms. We would be free to go to the ends of our thoughts on every issue as we i magine a better future for us all, including a possible future with men on the periphery, or one that does not include men at all.


Now as for "Gamergate", it is pretty clear that nerdy, socially inept men as group do not pose a serious threat to women's safety and civil rights! The reason feminists chose *them* instead of macho, misogynist jocks is that these are group of men who really have no social and political power.

When people want to go after a group that they don't belong to, they choose the weakest members of the group to pick on. I noticed this in inner city high schools when I was a teen, where black kids looking to pick on white kids would single out the shy, nerdy, social outcasts for bullying instead of the popular ones.

In my experience, more than half of the feminists I've met have given me a lot of sh*t for being socially inept because of autism; though not necessarily because I have the label of autistic. I can think of a number of them who called me a ret*d on a regular basis. No matter what you SAY that you stand for, if you don't practice what you preach you shouldn't be so dismayed when people stop taking you seriously and/or question your true motivations.

Given that there is NO consensus of the definition of race, and no consensus among the scientific community as to whether or not race is more than a social construct based on a persons appearance, this term "people of color" needs to be discarded. WTF makes white people some damn special that they get their own category while everyone else who isn't white is just "colored"? Blacks and Asians for example are 2 different groups of people with distinct (American)cultures who have only 1 thing in common: They aren't white. All these different "races" have different histories and cultures and deserve to be identified for what they ARE, instead of what they're not.

ANALOGY FAIL. Feminists no longer act on the principle of seeking gender equality, they are pushing for legislation that clearly favors their sex over the other. Such as anti-stalking laws that place the burden of proof on the accused to demonstrate their innocence. Sweden has no passed laws making accused rapists guilty until proven innocent.

idk there was that lady who works at a abortion clinic who waited for it to be a late stage abortion, filmed the whole thing smiling so she could show abortions should be a good thing, even had a abortion party.

This is what happens to any human created movement. It exists to accomplish a certain task. The people involved come, go, and attitudes change over time. Pretty soon, the movement is completely different from the day it was first created. Today, feminism is about hating the male.

I'm just going through the list of dudes who've posted on here and writing them down so I can make sure not to share anything of consequence with any of you in future, as a protective measure. I don't know if you realise how woman hating you are but it's pretty disturbing. You know who else hated feminism and female feminists and was autistic?

I love critically analysing culture and ideology with people who are truly interested. You're not. I don't have the energy to expend on you. If you are actually interested and would like to try rephrasing your question to me and your assumptions about me (and your pointed, challenging language without any basis in fact), I'd be happy to revisit this thread. Otherwise, men asking women to expend energy on their woman hatred is why I'm a feminist, dude.

I was the one who used the word "probably", not you. Apologies for misquoting you - you actually said you had "no doubt that there really are plenty of feminists who..." I appreciate that you might not have conveyed what you meant as precisely as you might have hoped to, but I still think the way you moved the goalposts is absurd.

I believe you have this back to front.

It wasn't "feminists" who "chose" gamers, but the other way around. A bunch of gamers threw abuse and unfounded accusations at a woman who cheated on her boyfriend, and the people who spoke up in her defence were abused and threatened in turn. These threats have forced people to leave their homes and suppressed their speech out of fear.

There is plenty of feminist thought attacking toxic hypermasculinity. Examples: 1 2 3 4 and, for good measure, 5. I haven't read all those articles all the way through so I don't necessarily endorse the sentiments they express, but it shows that they do "go after" these people. You'll find similar sentiments if you google "feminism lad culture" or "feminist criticisms of fraternities" or a number of other terms.

I'm sorry to hear about your bullying, that wasn't right.

No, who?

(inb4 ungrounded ableist nonsense)