Why are feminists so despised by so many people?

Discussion in 'Feel Good Feminism' started by fraggle_rock, Jan 27, 2014.

  1. newbie-one

    newbie-one one with the newbiverse

    Messages:
    9,265
    Likes Received:
    1,614
    So your objection is that I'm comparing dissimilar things, therefor my argument is invalid.

    Your objection is without merit. The arguments for supporting the war were the virtues ascribed to it, though its critics said that the true nature and purpose of the war differed from the official pretext. Those who criticized the war were dismissed with facile pejorative labels. This in analogous to feminism.

    In other words, in each case, one group claims that thing X possesses qualities and motives that justify it. Critics say thing X has other qualities and motives. Critics are given label Z to forestall debate about the true nature of X.

    If you would like to argue that a comparison of the justifications for feminism to the justifications for the gulf war is, by its nature, logically invalid, then I think that the burden of proof is on you.
     
  2. fraggle_rock

    fraggle_rock Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Likes Received:
    557
    First, look at this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_analogy

    You're comparing a widely misunderstood and misrepresented social movement to an extremely unpopular war, and you're using the least charitable justifications possible for your ironic support. It makes your analogy weak.

    I really don't think that ALL feminists dismiss their critics, but even if they do it seems like you're trying to say that simply having reasons for why you think your critics are wrong means your own beliefs are wrong. There is a difference between having GOOD reasons not to listen to your critics and having BAD reasons not to listen to your critics. Even supporters of the Iraq War could argue that Saddam was a genocidal tyrant and there should have been a true intervention years ago-- and they would have been right. It wasn't just about backwards brainwashed hicks drunk on patriotism and perceived persecution labeling their opponents terrorists... intelligent people supported the Iraq War, and they had intelligent reasons for doing so. I don't necessarily agree with the intelligent reasons but I respect that they're coming from a reasonable position. Being more charitable whenever possible makes your own argument stronger... you failed to do that.

    And with feminism, you're talking about millions of people with millions of different perspectives, not some uber-conformist cybernetic hivemind. They're not defending just one specific set of beliefs. Things are NOT that black and white between feminists.

    And I see far more anti-feminist BS out there than actual feminism. This is a culture where nobody listens to you unless you're saying something controversial or provocative, so only the idiots stand out and the perfectly reasonable people with their perfectly reasonable perspectives end up being drowned out. THIS is more of a problem than feminism, because it prevents people from having an intelligent, rational discussion and everyone ends up fighting over unrealistic extremes.

    I think we've even gotten to the point where people are mostly reacting to the reactions instead of looking at the actual movement... largely thanks to youtube and precious precious free speech. We hear sinister-sounding snippets of texts that have been intentionally or unintentionally misinterpreted and think 'OMG is that what they think?! That's horrible!'... without actually looking into the situation or trying to understand the other side.

    Feminists are largely about defending gender equality... they're not defending killing and shooting and raping and people losing their homes. The idea that gender equality is comparable to war is absurd in and of itself.

    If your analogy isn't invalid, it's definitely weak and awkward... and manipulative as well.

    I'm still waiting for an actual feminist to post in this thread.
     
    1 person likes this.
  3. nox_lumen

    nox_lumen Member

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    I used to think I supported and was a feminist. Equality for both genders looked like a good goal. Then too many of my friends went "feminist" shortly after a break up and it translated as "man-hater" instead of having anything to do with equality. Why the hell would I want to wear the label of a hate I don't want to share? They may represent the minority of the feminist movement, but they sure do get loud about it at a bar the moment the alcohol starts kicking in. It's the loud, drunk, man-hating, temporary feminist that will be remembered, and if I call myself such, it's what people will expect to see, and they will tune out anything of merit I had to say.

    Now I consider myself an equalist. After all, if it's really about equality and not domination or gender bias one way or another, why do we still need to call it feminism? How many men call themselves masculinists then say they support equality for both genders? And why would we take them seriously if they did? You don't call yourself monotheistic if you pray to more than one deity, so why does the same principle not apply in gender rights?

    It is valid to say that women are not currently equal in the courts. They may get to keep children in a divorce to spite a man, but can still lose a rape case because they must have been "asking for it". Many domestic violence cases are just as likely to rule in a woman's favor, even if she is the abuser, but Planned Parenthood may be crippled so far that she has limited care for what makes her a woman in the first place. We also still have the cultural expectation that a male must provide, so he has to pay money out for a pregnancy, but good luck to him if he wants custody when there is a child out of wedlock, meaning financially he may face the greater burden and need a higher wage but may not be permitted to offer emotional care. Men are to grunt and toil and pay up while women are to nurture and tend the hearth and home regardless of actual qualifications on the part of either, and it's not really fair to either.

    SO why still use the term feminist when both genders need support and rights?
     
  4. YouFreeMe

    YouFreeMe Visitor

    Because a small, very vocal subset of feminists make the most noise, even if they don't represent the majority.

    In my experience, the vast majority of women don't identify as feminists.
     
  5. newbie-one

    newbie-one one with the newbiverse

    Messages:
    9,265
    Likes Received:
    1,614
    First, I know what a false analogy is. Do not presume to edify me. Your posting a link to a wiki article does not constitute a counter argument, and is irrelevant. Suggesting that invalid analogies, in principle, exist, does not make my analogy invalid.

    Second, you originally posted that my analogy wasn't invalid. Then you changed your post to say that it was. I call bullshit.

    I explained the logical justification for the analogy in specific terms:
    You failed to demonstrate that the analogy was invalid.


    It is in the nature of analogies to compare heterogeneous entities to demonstrate an element of commonality. Your declaration that feminism is "widely misunderstood and misrepresented" and that the Iraq war is "extremely unpopular" does not demonstrate that a comparison between feminism and the Iraq war is invalid.


    No. The failure to be charitable may make someone like you not "feel good" about the analogy, and therefor not be persuaded by it. It does not, however, make the analogy weak.

    You're arguing about the particulars of the Iraq war itself, rather than the relevance of the analogy and the point that it made about the original subject.

    I will restate:
    So what you are saying is that feminism is good, where as the Iraq war is bad, therefor no analogy can be made between them.

    It is in the nature of analogies to compare things that are different to make clear a commonality. In other words, in an analogy, thing A is compared to thing B. Thing A and thing B are different. An analogy makes its point when aspect C is widely accepted as an element of thing B, but not of A, but one can demonstrate the commonality of things A and B so that thing A can be shown to also posses aspect C.

    That thing A and thing B have some aspect of dissimilarity does not render an analogy invalid, as it is in the nature of analogies to compare different things.


    Feminism is implicitly and inherently a supremacist movement. By making the feminine its title, it is positing the greater value of females, femininity, or feminine aspect.

    Therefor anyone who calls themselves a feminist is embracing a supremacist agenda.

    Further, at least some feminists explicitly endorse hatred of and attacks on men. You can not share an identity with those who make such endorsements without also participating in that hate, anymore than you can claim to be part of the liberal, "feel-good" wing of the KKK and not participate in hate.

    Therefor anyone who identifies themselves as a feminist is participating in a hate group.

    Beyond that, I have yet to encounter anyone who identifies themselves as a feminist who does not harbor a deep hostility toward men, regardless of what claims they make about their true motives.
     
  6. fraggle_rock

    fraggle_rock Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Likes Received:
    557
    What if feminism was suddenly exactly the same but called itself 'equalism'? Does that suddenly mean that all of those ideas about what equality is and how it could be achieved are suddenly no longer about supremacy?

    Come on.

    Now this is definitely a fallacy... and it's a really basic one. How are feminists supposed to control who goes around calling themselves a feminist, exactly? Does this mean that all Americans support the Iraq war too? They share an identity! How could you personally have done that? You must like killing people and helping oil companies, you American bastard.

    It's amazing how you can get upset about feminists lumping men into one category and then do the same thing for all feminists.

    I also don't think that you read the article I posted.

    That's irrelevant.
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. nox_lumen

    nox_lumen Member

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Wow. If I had know this was a public argument between e7m8 and fraggle rock and other opinions were non existent, I wouldn't have bothered.

    Maybe you two need to continue this in PM since other people don't count.
     
  8. fraggle_rock

    fraggle_rock Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Likes Received:
    557
    I can't make people want to reply to your posts any more than you can, nox. I read it but I couldn't really see anything in it that was interesting enough for me to want to reply. But now that you've thrown your little bitch fit, I guess I'm going to cave and do something that parents should never do with their children-- I'm going to give into your manipulative cries for attention.

    I get the impression that you seem to have the same misconceptions that other people do, and are dismissing the whole movement based on a handful of people that you personally don't like. There's nothing particularly interesting about that, even if you did elaborate a little more on what you believe.

    But feminists aren't opposed to unfair alimony settlements, or women being providers, or whatever it is you were trying to make a point about. They tend not to fight for those things, but that's only because they don't concern themselves with them-- much like doctors don't concern themselves with dentistry or teachers don't concern themselves with the principal's duties.

    It doesn't mean they're actively campaigning to make alimony less fair or that they oppose laws that would make it more fair... and I'm pretty sure that if you asked an actual feminist if they thought it was unfair for men to pay alimony all the time in every single case, they would say 'yes'.

    In fact, I think feminists would be MORE likely to accept a man who wanted to stay home and take care of the kids, or have custody of the children, etc. It's the 'normal' women who would think he wasn't being a 'real man' or that he should 'take charge and tell her what to do' or should be the provider/patriarch. Feminists think outside of those gender stereotypes-- that is literally the whole point. If they don't do that, then they're not actually feminists.

    I think a lot of the problems are the result of women taking advantage of the opportunities feminism has brought them without understanding that there needs to be a shift in their perspectives and expectations of men.
     
    1 person likes this.
  9. nox_lumen

    nox_lumen Member

    Messages:
    193
    Likes Received:
    7
    Since the question was why feminist are despised, it seemed entirely relevant to the topic.

    If the opinion from a former feminist is not a valid point of view or not interesting enough for you, you can still take your debate with e7m8 to PM. I don't object to discussion, but if discussion relevant to the topic is not of value to you, it's no longer a public disscusion.
     
  10. Anaximenes

    Anaximenes Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    9
    They're loved in Russia now. Death to those other fur coats.
     
  11. Anaximenes

    Anaximenes Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,854
    Likes Received:
    9
    Is that? why are the feminists so desired? not 'despised'.
     
  12. happilyinlove

    happilyinlove with myself :p

    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    45
    Because people are ignorant as hell. They think they should be able to shove their own opinions down other people's throats and dominate and can't understand when it happens to them. You have to fall into the female norm, even with women, or they get maaaaad :p
     
    1 person likes this.
  13. fraggle_rock

    fraggle_rock Member

    Messages:
    1,202
    Likes Received:
    557
    Are you a real feminist, happilyinlove?
     
  14. happilyinlove

    happilyinlove with myself :p

    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    45
    Well, what do you mean by REAL feminist? Any woman who advocates the betterment of women and equal rights is a "feminist" to some degree. Am I hard core hell bent? No. Not in my opinion. But Im definitely more masculine than some women because this honey badger gives few fux! :) :)

    I'm not really into labels though.

    Do I think women deserve better pay if we perform better at work? Hell yes. If that makes me a feminist, so be it.
     
    1 person likes this.
  15. Moonglow181

    Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    16,175
    Likes Received:
    4,916
    Not hard core bent either here....I like being female. :)
     
  16. GLENGLEN

    GLENGLEN Banned

    Messages:
    27,031
    Likes Received:
    6,515

    Nice...:)



    Cheers Glen.
     
  17. usedtobehoney

    usedtobehoney Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,069
    Likes Received:
    59
    I basically agree with the article. Any subculture or counter culture movement that becomes big enough will become marginalized by the media and many are going to learn about that movement in inflammatory ways and become offended because of it.

    Because I have been in many different subcultures in my life, I've seen it in many, many different formats.

    There is also the side of it where people don't want to confront their prejudices and claim to not be prejudiced when it's very clear they are.

    The whole "I'm not racist but..." sentiment.

    I would consider myself a feminist. I try to help people to understand the different sides of equality. This means defending men, males and masculinity, being an intermediary between different races and cultures and more.

    These things become personal and no one wants to feel like tons of people are against them, so the message becomes unclear at times. When people stop being on the defense and start listening to each other things become more clear.

    There are definitely some feminists who miss the point in my opinion...but that is the same with every movement known to humanity.
     
    1 person likes this.
  18. YouFreeMe

    YouFreeMe Visitor

  19. eggsprog

    eggsprog anti gang marriage HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,367
    Likes Received:
    2,861
    There are always nutjobs in every group that give the rest of the group a bad name. I think it's worse now than it used to be, because the internet gives everyone a voice.
     
  20. newbie-one

    newbie-one one with the newbiverse

    Messages:
    9,265
    Likes Received:
    1,614
    It wouldn't make the ideas themselves any more or less about supremacy. "Equalism" would not be implicitly and inherently supremacist, however.

    They are not supposed to control who goes around calling themselves a feminist. As in the example that I gave, not everyone who is a member of the KKK can control the membership of each chapter. You can't claim, however, that you are part of the "feel good" live-and-let-live wing of the KKK, and that you are not responsible for the fact that a few bad apples give the organization a bad name. You can't claim to share an identity with a hate group and not also be part of that hate.

    Feminists who don't want to participate in a hate group need to find themselves a new name. Your "equalist" example is a good suggestion.

    Not all Americans share an identity, or an ideology. The country that you are born into is not a matter of one's choice. It also does not mean that you support the actions of your government. To some degree, you have some choice in what country you live in (though not always), so there is some accountability for choosing your nationality, though not nearly as much as choosing an ideology, which is completely a matter of one's own choice.

    No one chooses their gender at birth, and having a particular gender does not inherently imply culpability.

    Participation in ideologies like feminism are completely matters of choice, and therefor one can be held accountable for one's choices. Feminists are choosing
    1. To participate in an implicitly and inherently supremacist movement

    2. To share in identity with a hate group.

    So call yourself an equalist, or something else, if you don't want to be part of that.

    I don't think you read my post when I said
    If you have a point to make about fallacies, then make it.



    The true motives of feminism are highly relevant. Claiming to have high motives does not necessarily mean that one has high motives.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice