I hate feminazis

Post Reply New Topic

I apologize, I believe I fell into a bit of a No True Scotsman fallacy. I have trouble seeing CB as a feminist at all, based on the definition of striving for equality. But then I have trouble with exclusionists in general when it comes to equality struggles, for two reasons. Alone, you are equal to everyone, but it's not really valid. And, I remember when Second Wave feminists went from wanting equality to turning inward until all that was left of the movement was middle/upper middle class, white, english-speaking cis- women. And when she teamed up with the very male-superior, conservative Christian, Pacific Justice Institute to dox that girl in Colorado, a minor, I could not see her as a feminist at all.

Apology accepted.

I've noticed the no true scotsman fallacy quite a bit by both sides of the political spectrume when their ideology is criticized and in particular whenever they try to cover up or deny the more extreme behavior of some of their members. I suspect this has a lot to do with group identity and social conformity.

Radical ideology should really be distinguished from progressive ideology because the former assumes the Marxist worldview of a 2 class society when modern American society has many different layers in between the very top and the very bottom.

I was going to continue, but honestly? I'm out. Not worth it.

You were going to continue with propaganda but you know realize you were about to commit yet another *no true scotsman* fallacy!

We get it: Political correctness is all about proper usage of language and not offending any "group". It isn't really that concerned with completely eradicating oppression and injustice across the board because PC people are using left-wing ideology as a social climbing strategy. Journalist Tom Wolfe noticed this back in the early 70s as he described in his book Radical Chic, But I digress.....

Well, I could give you someone like Marcotte or Hess or Valenti or any number of prominent feminists who frequently got off the rails a bit, but I suspect that would quickly devolve into an endless no true Scotsman argument, with me providing links and you finding reasons why they're not real feminists, etc, but that sounds profoundly boring.

Here's a better question; why can't you seem to acknowledge that your 'tribe' has some obnoxious and overzealous people in it who give the rest of you a bad name, and that maybe some of the people so hostile to feminism aren't displaying sexist/misogynist tendencies so much as they are a well earned aversion to feminists? Also, have you found hurling perjorative, loaded terms at people you disagree with to be an effective means of persuasion? Cause it's not doing much for me besides hardening my opinion that most of you people are ideologically insulated and unable to deal with real criticism of your core beliefs, hence the lashing out.

Radical Feminism is the bane and the cancer of the feminist movement and strive for gender equality, they are not egalitarians, they are not humanists, they are the complete opposite and should be classified in the same category as many hate groups, they should be ostracized and booed down by an angry mob and have rotten tomatoes thrown at them.

Not all of them a bad. I think people like Camille Paglia and Tammy Bruce are very sober minded feminists.

Those are feminists and not feminazis.

This is kind of the issue, debate is begin shut down.

Lauren Southern who journalled her experience her experiences in a Women's studies course.

I'm right with you. As soon as the reworked term "PC" is dragged out and used in an ironic manner and "feminism" is redefined away from any semblance of equality (ie men are oppressed by feminists), the discussion just isn't worth the effort. Too much rhetoric, not enough intelligent conversation.

I don't personally "feel" oppressed by feminists most of the time, I have very few social ties. However I do see some feminist groups are directly undermining basic rights (including their own), by supporting ideas which are counter to freedom of expression and even freedom of movement. The undermines the rights of all of us especially if it becomes law.

I feel I should say something, as this counter productive to the goal of equality and they can support ideas such as censorship and policy akin to segregation, when civil right group fought so hard to break these chains. To say this is a relative small number might be true but to deny their influence, especially with recent events is burying your head in the sand or simply being unaware or naive.

TBH I find many of the male equivalent of these group just as abhorrent and draconian in their views. I worry about precedent and what is becoming social norms, when it come violating the principle of rights.

Everyone should challenge these ideas. It is not a men vs. women issue. I want equality and choice for all.

I also think part of the problem is seeing men an women issues as somehow mutually opposing, and broad conspiracies such as the patriarchy don't exactly help.

I appreciate the post of Lauren Southern.

I took a women's study class back in the 1970's so it was the early days of this movement. It sounds like Lauren's experience is a lot like mine except it seems much more radical now than in the early days.

My class spent a lot of time talking about women being forced to be home makers and not being allowed into the workplace but it appears that this topic has decreased in modern feminism since more women are in the workplace. I had a hard time with it in the class because the women in my family have always worked. It comes from growing up in a "working class" family and not in a more privileged middle class home. Because of this, I never managed to be able to relate to the things being taught in the class. When one of their basic premises didn't correlate to my experience, it made it hard to accept the premises of things outside my experience.

We also were told how women make a smaller income than men. It made me determined to ask for more money with every job I have taken and - amazingly- I have always made the same income as my male counterparts. A feminist friend of mine was outraged when I mentioned this because she felt she should be given the highest level of pay without having to ask for it. Sorry. The world doesn't work that way.

I would always ask for more pay than what was originally offered and I would say "I will be worth it to your business". I always got an increase. Then I would always ask for more money after one year. I almost always got that too because I am a good worker and they wanted to keep me. The only time I didn't get an increase was because (they told me) it would increase my pay above that of the most senior colleague of mine, which wasn't allowed. That told me where the limit was and that I would have to work elsewhere if I wanted a better income.

I have had "friends" who were feminists that I had to leave behind because of their intolerance. One friend gave me some book shelves but I had to promise that no men would ever use them. She attended my son's Christmas Concert (he was five) and complained that the show promoted racism, sexism and fat-ism. The later was because the kids performed a song about Santa Claus being put on a diet by Mrs. Claus. I finally couldn't take the constant criticism of everyday society and I had to stop doing friend stuff with her.

Your friend, obviously, didn't care for men.

When somebody dislikes men like that, I'd wonder if some guy really did something really nasty to her.

All good points.

The reality is that choice doesn't necessarily produce equality of outcome, and equality of outcome is not to be confused with equal opportunity. As Christina Hoff Sommers has been trying to point out.

There are many more women engineers as a proportion in Russia and that is a deeply patriarchal society. It is simply down to if you have a capacity to be involved in one of the well paying jobs in an economy large dependent on oil an gas, then they would take it or risk languishing in poverty.

I went to a engineering university, and they tried really hard to increase the 2-3% rate to no avail. A new vice chancellor came in and the university is a predominately a humanities university now.

In other technical jobs such as veterinary medicine, the situation has completely switched. It used to be almost all male, now it it is mostly female graduates.

So it is not the case the women can't do technical jobs, they just tend prefer specific type of technical jobs over others.

Also the whole pay gap thing is really contentious. The law is very clear that pay gap is illegal. If you don't pay the same for the same job you can and will go to tribunal. In the same job there really isn't evidence that the pay gap is still there.

The feminist groups point out the lower paying careers of women. That may be true, but it doesn't necessarily mean it is cause by discrimination. There is also very low paying jobs men do.

A road sweeper generally earns less that an nurse, child care assistant or even a domestic worker, and also males nurses face a bit of a stigma (although that is changing).

Men who argue against the existence of a pay gap remind me of christian fundies and republicans who argue against the existence of climate change.