Politics On gender politics

"It is impossible for anyone to know what they're talking about and disagree with me, therefore anyone who disagrees with me must not know what they're talking about or be 'biased'."

You were saying about a bias so obvious it's a slap in the face? You don't get more biased than literally defining everyone who disagrees with you or feminism as wrong/biased/misogynist/whatever purely on the grounds they disagree with you or feminism.

 

Well let's see, my take away from there signs was that they thought;
Feminists were...
sluts
acted like victims
pretended that there was a war against them
hate men

thought they were better than men
were only doing it for entitlements and attention
aren't capable of critical thinking
corrupt
and of course, want to make woman into controlling monsters.

As someone who identifies as a feminist, whose mother and two daughters are and were feminists I can safely say from my perspective all of that is absolute bullshit.
I do agree with the bit about the consistent assault on women's rights but that's part and parcel of the attacks on all minorities.

 

An example of an anti-feminist who doesnt know what she is talking about -- Susan Patton

Mistake sex? Really!

 

The author of the original "Dear Colleague" letter is personally overseeing at least 10 cases exactly like this, NCHERM has issued an official reprimand of colleges who charge young men with rape for regretted or drunk sex purely because they're men even when evidence actively contradicts those charges, and last I checked there were upwards of 20 major lawsuits over violations of equal protection and due process.

Meanwhile Amy Schumer gets awards for bragging about the time she raped someone too drunk to even know where he was or what he was doing, and mocking him over how bad the sex was while she raped him.

Those are some nice straw women you've got there. Be a shame if something were to happen to them...

Woman #1: Argues that organized feminism has become corrupt and hateful, and no longer pursues real equality but rather prejudicial double standards.
Woman #2: Argues against specific, tangible, demonstrable actions modern feminism routinely engages in which are part of Victim Cred culture.
Woman #3: Simply states she's an Egalitarian
Woman #4: Argues against Affirmative Action (a tangible, real world action), lists specific reasons why she believes she already has equality of opportunity, and lists specific tangible things feminists have actually said to her personally such as telling her to kill herself over 50 times.
Woman #5: Argues against Victim Cred culture, demonstrably false statistics, and patriarchy theory.
Woman #6: Argues against feminist rejection of the systemic and institutionalized oppression of men, and specific feminist rhetoric which is demeaning towards women.
Woman #7: Argues against the near-universal tactic (which she has personally experienced) of accusing anyone who disagrees with feminism of being misogynist and cussing at her.
Woman #8: Argues against the specific concept of "objectification"
Woman #9: Argues against Victim Cred culture
Woman #10: Argues against misandry (which feminism denies exists), Victim Cred culture, and the hostility she faces from feminists for letting her husband take the lead in their marriage
Woman #11: Articulates a belief that feminism is not seeking equality but special treatment (you got one right, but it's a demonstrable fact feminists seek special entitlements above men)
Woman #12: Argues against the near universal feminist erasure and denial of men's issues
Woman #13: Argues against Victim Cred culture
Woman #14: Argues against misandry (which feminism denies exists)
Woman #15: There is no woman #15.


The word "slut" literally doesn't even appear in a single picture. Color me surprised that a feminist would stoop to outright lying to smear people who disagree with feminism.

 

This is seriously frustrating.
I was trying to go back and back to play your game with each sign but now it's telling me the embed doesn't work for my device.
It Fucking Well Worked Yesterday!

Sorry, this tablet and I have been at odds from day one.
Not having my stuff has made it worse.

Anyway, I didn't pull slut out of a hat.
One of the signs said something to the effect of "I don't need feminism to justify slutty behavior. "
Now, if I misread their handwriting I will do a full retraction but I would not have Fucking made that up.

As to the buzz words you like to toss around.
I said acted like victims, you dismissed that as Victim Cred (whatever the hell that is).
Most them I took right off the signs for example the one about critical thinking.
So I guess we'll have to look elsewhere for straw woman.

 

Yeah, see, that kind of hissy fit may seem impressive and high brow to you but really it's nothing more than a child's response of "I know you are but what am I". It also predictably winds up creating a train wreck of demonstrably false absurdities and even outright non-sequiturs. Then again considering the usual feminist response to the MRM starts with cussing and rapidly progresses to death threats, felonies, and violent crimes I suppose this IS a step forwards for you.

 

They were cogent arguments about specific, demonstrable, tangible problems with feminism. They become absurdities and outright non-sequiturs when you try to aim them at someone else, like a democrat trying to accuse a teabagger of being a "bleeding heart liberal". Bleeding heart liberal makes sense when it's a teabagger talking about a democrat, it's an absurd non-sequitur when it's a democrat throwing it back at a teabagger.

 

And here we go again. Erase, Obfuscate, or Explain away. No True Scotsman them out of the definition of "feminist", NAFALT, and if all else fails flat out lie and claim they don't exist and are mythical straw men.

And outside of the most powerful and influential feminist researchers and academics, every single major mainstream feminist website on the internet, hashtags participated in by millions of people, the largest feminist organizations in the united states acting in the real world, and repeated massive public protests where feminists commit felonies and even violent crimes without any opposition whatsoever, or a single meaningful act of opposition or even rebuke FROM any mainstream major feminist website or publication.

Or to put it more simply: The only time anyone other than a handful of individual obscure bloggers, who get death threats just for doing it, ever even says anything to criticise these behaviors is when they're using it as a form of attack against someone criticising feminism.

Oh and once again you repeated the same fallacious argument claiming that it is impossible for anyone to disagree with feminism, therefore anyone who does disagree with or criticise feminism MUST not understand feminism. In short it's impossible for you to ever be wrong, it's impossible for anyone to ever criticise or disagree with feminism, and anyone who does so is wrong by default.

This is why it is impossible to ever have any real conversation with you. You don't say "That's wrong because XYZ disproves it", you say "If they understood feminism they wouldn't disagree with it, therefore they must be wrong". You START with the conclusion that feminism is perfect and work backwards from there.

And here's where the denialism and apologia starts. You and all the other apologists don't give a damn about the tangible real world actions of actual feminists in the name of feminism and do nothing but sit there with your fingers in your ears screaming "They're not true scotsmen, they're NOT TRUE SCOTSMEN!" over and over again while rocking in the corner.

Your denial is beyond absurdity in the face of the sheer breadth and magnitude of the real world actions taken by feminists in the name of feminism. "trolls", "bloggers", and "silly facebook groups" don't pass or block laws, they don't skew the single largest most definitive study of sexual and IP violence, they don't shut down entire conferences on suicide prevention or domestic violence, they don't shut down shelters, they don't commit shootings, they don't singlehandedly prevent equal custody from becoming law with the power of their lobbying.



Feminists threaten to kill woman for saying men need abuse shelters.
Feminists prevent a meeting about male suicide.
Feminists stage mock murders to scare men.
Feminist attacks male cartoonist and is hailed a hero of feminism.
Feminists shut down forum for battered husbands.
Propaganda campaign against male fathers wanting custody.
Feminists wish to slander accused names before convicted.
Try to shut down female prisons.
Create rape laws that exclude female rapists.
Make it impossible to charge women with rape.
Feminists against equal custody.
Female felons should serve home sentences.
Told judges to be lenient on women.
Feminists cover up female domestic violence.
Feminists don’t want the gov to help unemployed men.
Feminists launch campaigns to help girls only while boys are doing worse in every facet of education.
Males who were raped as a child still have to pay child support.
Women should have the right to put a child up for adoption before the father gets custody.
Feminists against beyond reasonable doubt when it’s male rapists.
5 rights feminism ignores for men.
Feminists blame males for their abuse.
The primary aggressor clause where only men get charged with abuse.
Shame men into going to war.
Feminists dismiss female child rapists.
Feminists say men can’t talk about domestic abuse.
Feminists mock a man who has his dick cut off.
Strawmanning MRA members.
feminists attack church.
Feminists transphobia
Feminists slander the MRM
Again,
And again,
Call them terrorists.
Feminists say Men can’t be raped.
Feminists defend female raping minor.
Feminist defends why fucking an 8 year old boy isn’t rape.
Feminists primary aggressor clause discriminates against males.
Feminists cover up female domestic abuse stats.
Woman smashing bottle in mans face in public. Nobody gives a fuck.
Jezebel mocks men who are abused.
Feminists make sure the gov doesn’t spend money on male shelters or male research.
Female on male abuse in public is at best ignored, and at worst celebrated.
Public stops a man from abusing a woman in public, same crowd laughs when the roles are reversed.
No funding for male shelter.
Founder of Canadas only male shelter for abuse forced to close due to lack of funding before committing suicide.


And that's not even getting into the recent blood libel not one major feminist publication or website publically rebuked or the most recent wave of death threats not one major feminist publication or website publically rebuked, just as none of these 40+ stains on feminism were ever meaningfully opposed by any mainstream feminists or meaningfully rebuked by any major feminist publications or websites.

The only time anything is said is as a weapon to silence those who try to criticise feminism, only insofar as is necessary to defend feminism from criticism, and only for so long as is necessary to silence that criticism.

You're right, we're not on the same page. I judge feminism based on evidence, real world evidence, of what the majority of feminists and the most powerful feminists are currently DOING. You refuse to judge feminism at all, you refuse to accept any criticism at all, you refuse to even accept the possibility of the existence of any legitimate criticism.

You can't have a serious discussion with someone whose every argument is based on the core premise that feminism is never wrong, and works backwards from there to invent an excuse why the person disagreeing with or criticising it must be wrong.

 

I couldn't look at all of those links but the one about men can't be raped is pure drek.
It was an effort to weaken the rape laws in India so that it would be easier for men to make counter charges when they were accused.
Bad law writing was what was about.
--- merged: Jul 14, 2014 8:01 AM ---
And seriously, isn't this the debate technique called "Bury Them in Bullshit".

 

Of course it was, because that's what the feminists responsible for blocking a law that would do nothing other than legally recognize men can be raped said, and feminists never lie. especially about female rapists and male rape victims. It's not like they lie about it so much that even here in America the most powerful and influential feminist researcher deliberately erased half of all rape victims for political gain, because in her own words men are never raped by women and only "choose to engage in unwanted sex".

No, it's not like that's a pathetically transparent and utterly disgusting excuse to continue to erase male victims of female rapists, because it's not like feminism has been saying for decades that "98% of all rapists are men", it's not like that lie has become so widespread that people on this very forum have repeated it, it's not like that lie is politically necessary for many of feminism's claims about men and "male pattern violence".

It's not like you literally just committed an act of sexist rape apology, it's not like you just explicitly stated that you believe women should have massively superior rights over men in court, that men should not have the right to charge a woman with rape.

And the truly terrifying, infuriating, and saddening thing is you honestly don't understand how that's sexist rape apologia. You want to talk about rape culture? You just demonstrated the REAL rape culture, the rape culture that doesn't just erase male rape victims it goes so far as to say they shouldn't even be able to charge their rapist in court as long as she not only rapes them but charges them with rape afterwards.

You just demonstrated EXACTLY the kind of demand for special privileges and sexist prejudice that those 14 women were criticising feminism for.

Is linking an anti-vaxxer to the overwhelming proof vaccines don't cause autism "burying them in bullshit"?
Is linking a climate change denier to the overwhelming proof global climate change is real "burying them in bullshit"?
Is linking a creationist to the overwhelming proof evolution is real "burying them in bullshit"?

Why then is linking to overwhelming proof of claims against feminism "burying them in bullshit"?

Oh, right, it's because feminism is Jesus. Feminism is God. Feminism is never wrong, and anyone who ever does anything but agree wholeheartedly with feminism and feminists MUST be wrong.

 

Holy shit. That's all I'm gonna say. That's all that's warranted. That is the very limit of what is justified.

 

If I'm trying to have a reasonable conversation I will put one or two links in order to prove my point, maybe even three.
Fifty is meant purely to be a way of saying, see, see, look how much evidence I have.
It's meant to overwhelm, to be obnoxious, not to really be a mode of debate.

And no, I did not say men couldn't Fucking be raped.
Do not put words in my mouth or the people who had to fight the badly written law.
Better legal scholars than you or I decided the law was inherently flawed and had some seriously dangerous consequences if it passed.
It wasn't just woman's groups that felt that way.

 

Seconded.

 

I am the the first to admit when the groups I associate with have flaws, just as I try to to be honest about my own flaws.
It's the only way to get better.
Yes, liberals have a habit of standing around and smelling their own farts, at least the east and west coast ones.
Those of us in red states don't have time for that shit.
Yes, feminists can be shrill.
Yes, intellectuals are smug.

Nobody is perfect but that does not make them evil.
I think there are people in the men's movement who are decent and have good intentions.
Too bad they are drowned out by a cacophony of crazy.

 

Since I've cited every claim I've made about feminism I can only assume you're referring to my description of your utter refusal to even accept the possibility of criticising feminism.

That thing you're literally doing right. now.

Just like you're right now you're making up the accusation that I oppose feminism "of any form", despite three of the leading MRAs have been a former president of the N.O.W, the only man to ever be elected three times to the board of directors of the NYC N.O.W., and a self-identifying feminist. That's leaving out the unprovable anecdote that one of my closest friends is an ardent feminist... or rather was, she was viciously attacked by her peers for daring to even consider the legitimacy of anything I'd said.

Unlike you I've been very clear about specific and tangible issues I have with feminism, specific and tangible issues which if addressed would lead to me having no issue with feminism.
You on the other hand refuse to ever allow yourself to be nailed to any solid position, continually moving the goalposts or relying on bad faith tactics like your universal insistence that anyone who ever criticises or disagrees with feminism is either a misogynist or doesn't understand feminism.

That's the ultimate bad faith argument, it completely denies the possibility of legitimately disagreeing with you or, more particularly, your religion.

Binary thinking. Either you're with us or you're against us. Feminism means equality, if you aren't a feminist you hate equality and hate women. If you disagree with feminism you don't understand feminism, no one can ever understand feminism and disagree with it. Disagreeing with feminism is in and of itself proof you are wrong.

So of course any sources, any sources at all, that ever disagree with or criticise feminism are specious or biased. Once you make the very act of disagreement itself illegitimate all evidence is likewise illegitimate.

Real irony is someone who believes in an actual conspiracy theory, one which claims that evidence against it is in and of itself proof it exists, accusing other people of being disenfranchised conspiracy theorists. Or of using "scripted responses", because evidently it's perfectly legitimate for feminists to constantly repeat the same empirically disproven claims over and over again but it's not legitimate to give the same answers to them again and again.

Who knew facts have a usage limit. How does that work exactly? If ten people say "2+2=5" and you correct them does the eleventh person get away because you're not allowed to tell them 2+2 really equals 4? Or is it the 20th person? Or the 200th? Where's the line drawn? Where does the same question stop getting the same response?

You mean exactly like you, right now, screaming "It doesn't count" with your fingers in your ears while I base my judgments entirely on tangible evidence from the real world? How you start from the conclusion that feminism is incapable of being wrong, therefore all evidence, criticism, or disagreement is illegitimate?

What was that about thinking in absolutes again? You're doing it again. Forcing the binary that because it's impossible to legitimately disagree with or criticise feminism anyone that does so must also be anti-woman, anti-equality, anti-intellectual, anti-liberal, anti-everything you consider good and agree with.