Is feminism a dirty word?

FactCheck · 12-10-2014 11:37AM

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

I think there's a strong chance in fairness that those loons shot her dog, but she shouldn't have stated they definitely did it; it discredits her.

I mean maybe, but I live in the British countryside and I can tell you I know of a LOT of dogs shot by angry farmers for roaming into their fields. It's very very common.

mrkiscool2 · 12-10-2014 11:39AM

B0jangles wrote: »

I recognise that she was treated very badly in the past; it appears that her experiences have led her to believe that ALL women are bad, not just the individuals that harrassed and abused her.

If a prominent feminist said "Women are gentle, honest and straightforward. Men are convoluted, deceptive and dangerous", no-one here would care if she had been raped and abused by various men in the past, she'd be dismissed as a lunatic misandrist who was irreparably damaged by her past. We've had threads here on that very topic.

But Ms. Pizzey is apparently immune from such criticism.

I definitely would. I can completely understand how hard it is to trust people after being attacked. The fact that Pizzey was victimised by a lot of women (it wasn't just 1 or 2 loons like the posts here are pointing it out to be). Like if a woman was raped and feared all men because of her rape would that be justified? Of course. Just like if a man is beaten by his partner or if a woman is threatened and her pet murdered they would also fear the gender that hurt them.

Also, I'm not posting here about a lot of the crazy feminists or the fact that feminism really doesn't speak out against them. I'm here because I hate the fact that women who campaign for women under the guise of getting gender equality can get away with that sh1t. I'm here because I hate the fact that because I'm for gender equality people say "Well you're a feminist then". I'm here because I hate the fact that sexism, rape and violence against men is laughed at and if the men complain they are told to "man up". That's why I'm posting here.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 11:44AM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

The fact that Pizzey was victimised by a lot of women (it wasn't just 1 or 2 loons like the posts here are pointing it out to be).

Posts here are NOT doing that, really.

Like if a woman was raped and feared all men because of her rape would that be justified? Of course. Just like if a man is beaten by his partner or if a woman is threatened and her pet murdered they would also fear the gender that hurt them.

I don't think it's justified at all. I can see where it comes from but it's not justified. In the case of Pizzey too - she's a woman; so she's calling herself violent and intimidating and convoluted, deceptive and dangerous. Logic fail.

B0jangles · 12-10-2014 11:45AM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I definitely would. I can completely understand how hard it is to trust people after being attacked. The fact that Pizzey was victimised by a lot of women (it wasn't just 1 or 2 loons like the posts here are pointing it out to be). Like if a woman was raped and feared all men because of her rape would that be justified? Of course. Just like if a man is beaten by his partner or if a woman is threatened and her pet murdered they would also fear the gender that hurt them.

Also, I'm not posting here about a lot of the crazy feminists or the fact that feminism really doesn't speak out against them. I'm here because I hate the fact that women who campaign for women under the guise of getting gender equality can get away with that sh1t. I'm here because I hate the fact that because I'm for gender equality people say "Well you're a feminist then". I'm here because I hate the fact that sexism, rape and violence against men is laughed at and if the men complain they are told to "man up". That's why I'm posting here.

Would you 100% accept their views as an accurate representation of reality or would you question if their traumatic experiences may have distorted their perception of all men/women?

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 11:46AM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I'm here because I hate the fact that sexism, rape and violence against men is laughed at and if the men complain they are told to "man up".

Laughed at? Not in my world.

By whom?

Who tells men to man up? From what I see it's... other men. So why are you blaming that on feminism?

mrkiscool2 · 12-10-2014 11:51AM

B0jangles wrote: »

Would you 100% accept their views as an accurate representation of reality or would you question if their traumatic experiences may have distorted their perception of all men/women?

That's the thing though. I could go into something here about "what is reality" and get through a good 3 or 4 paragraphs explaining how everyone's idea of normality is different and blah blah blah. But I'll just say that reality is different to everyone. Also, every experience in your life distorts something. So the question isn't really valid. A person believes what a person believes and sure, over time you hope that those beliefs change but Ms. Pizzey deals with feminists sluring abusive and disgusting things everyday for what she believes in. She also deals with men who want to live in a better world for themselves and their children. Those things distort her reality to see things that way.

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Laughed at? Not in my world.
By whom?

Who tells men to man up? From what I see it's... other men. So why are you blaming that on feminism?

Well I was the victim of domestic violence. I remember my ex slapping me in public and her friends laughing at her. One of my male friends told her to stop and they laughed and told him that he should get me to "man up" so I wouldn't get slapped around by them.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 11:57AM

Frankly, seeing as Pizzey is a woman, she's being an idiot. Or perhaps she's one of those arrogant "All women (except me)" types. Yes that's probably it.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 11:57AM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Well I was the victim of domestic violence. I remember my ex slapping me in public and her friends laughing at her. One of my male friends told her to stop and they laughed and told him that he should get me to "man up" so I wouldn't get slapped around by them.

Sorry to read it. What a pack of *****.

FactCheck · 12-10-2014 12:11PM

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Well I was the victim of domestic violence. I remember my ex slapping me in public and her friends laughing at her. One of my male friends told her to stop and they laughed and told him that he should get me to "man up" so I wouldn't get slapped around by them.

Unfortunately I don't think Erin Pizzey would consider this domestic violence. As she wrote in the Daily Mail a few years ago:

Erin Pizzey wrote:

To me, the definition of domestic violence is quite clear: if you are not in fear of your life, you are not suffering it.

She also confesses to having committed violent acts like the one your ex-girlfriend committed against you, and isn't the least bit regretful:

Erin Pizzey wrote:

I’ve been known in my time to lob the odd glass of wine in the heat of the moment. Indeed, there is something frightfully satisfying about chucking wine at somebody.

Honestly I think that while she's done some admirable things in the past, she's a bit messed up in the head and newspapers and charities and activists ought to just leave her be rather than dragging her into the spotlight when she clearly isn't well.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 12:16PM

Ah jeez, she's all over the place. Her condemnation of women despite being one herself makes more sense now.

Sir Arthur Daley · 12-10-2014 12:30PM

She must be on the vino.

mrkiscool2 · 12-10-2014 03:58PM

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Sorry to read it. What a pack of *****.

I wish I could say that was the worst of it but it wasn't.

FactCheck wrote: »

Honestly I think that while she's done some admirable things in the past, she's a bit messed up in the head and newspapers and charities and activists ought to just leave her be rather than dragging her into the spotlight when she clearly isn't well.

I don't think throwing a glass of wine in someone's face is domestic violence. Maybe it can be considered that but I've done things I regret in anger, think we all have. Not defending how she thinks about domestic violence but all the same.

FactCheck · 12-10-2014 04:12PM

I don't know how you can say throwing a glass at someone isn't domestic violence but slapping them is?

They are both dangerous, abusive things to do. Doesn't matter the gender of the person doing them or the person on the receiving end. They are both violent, unacceptable acts.

hatrickpatrick · 12-10-2014 04:23PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Paul Elam, founder of A Voice For Men, has said this, regarding female rape victims (worth reading the full quote, rather than just the bolded bit):

http://web.archive.org/web/20111103174336/http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/false-rape-culture/challenging-the-etiology-of-rape/

He is a scumbag, who brings that entire site into disrepute.

Paul Elam is indeed a scumbag, but so are Harriet Harmen and Ivana Bacick with (for example) their views about treating men and women differently in court for the same crimes (guess which gender they favour leniency for?)

Now the question is, why is it ok for feminists to use assholed like Elam to discredit the entire MRA movement, but as soon as one cites Harmen or Bacick to discredit the feminist movement, it's all "Feminism isn't a hive mind" and other such BS?

Fundamentally, most of these issues are caused by feminists wanting to have their cake and eat it. The same standards must be applied to everyone, otherwise someone somewhere is discriminating. Simple as.

mrkiscool2 · 12-10-2014 04:25PM

FactCheck wrote: »

I don't know how you can say throwing a glass at someone isn't domestic violence but slapping them is?

They are both dangerous, abusive things to do. Doesn't matter the gender of the person doing them or the person on the receiving end. They are both violent, unacceptable acts.

I assumed she meant the content of the glass, not the actually glass. If she threw the actual glass at someone that's a completely different story.

Rums · 12-10-2014 04:33PM

I had an extreme feminist teacher in secondary school, she once gave me a 30 minute lecture after I held a door for her... she was really angry, but I tend to hold doors for anyone doesn't matter what age they are or gender if I am first to a door and there is someone close behind me I open it and let them pass through first, I don't know why I do it but it is something I have always done maybe because when I was younger I spent a lot more time with my grandparents and great grandparents who often needed people to hold doors for them.

For me after that feminism became a scary word because how the hell was I supposed to be able to tell the difference between being polite to a women and being a ''chauvinist pig'' in the words of said teacher.

I still hold the door for people if I am first to it and frankly at this stage I don't care if this somehow makes me sexist, ageist, racist or whatever other evil sinister being that holds doors it makes me.

RDM_83 again · 12-10-2014 04:37PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Paul Elam is indeed a scumbag, but so are Harriet Harmen and Ivana Bacick with (for example) their views about treating men and women differently in court for the same crimes (guess which gender they favour leniency for?)

Now the question is, why is it ok for feminists to use assholed like Elam to discredit the entire MRA movement, but as soon as one cites Harmen or Bacick to discredit the feminist movement, it's all "Feminism isn't a hive mind" and other such BS?.

To me the difference is, people like Paul Elam, may be loud voices in the MRA movement but overall the MRA's have a very small voice in society.
Harmen and Baccik are loud voices in the feminist movement who are in positions of relative power (Harmen in particular) and feminism is a loud voice in society.

Someone like Elam may cause a stir online but his views are never going to influence public discourse or policy, a prominent feminist who's a member of a party in goverment can.

hatrickpatrick · 12-10-2014 04:39PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Someone like Elam may cause a stir online but his views are never going to influence public discourse or policy, a prominent feminist who's a member of a party in goverment can.

This is a much better way of expressing what I was trying to say a few pages back - extremist MRAs don't currently have real-world impact, but extremist feminists are causing social damage and serious damage to a lot of fundamental freedoms.

KomradeBishop · 12-10-2014 05:32PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Paul Elam is indeed a scumbag, but so are Harriet Harmen and Ivana Bacick with (for example) their views about treating men and women differently in court for the same crimes (guess which gender they favour leniency for?)

Now the question is, why is it ok for feminists to use assholed like Elam to discredit the entire MRA movement, but as soon as one cites Harmen or Bacick to discredit the feminist movement, it's all "Feminism isn't a hive mind" and other such BS?

Fundamentally, most of these issues are caused by feminists wanting to have their cake and eat it. The same standards must be applied to everyone, otherwise someone somewhere is discriminating. Simple as.

Feminism isn't a hive mind though, so it's a valid thing to say. The problem with what you're saying there, is you're generalizing about feminists, when what you really mean is individual/specific feminists, being hypocritical in the way you speak of.
Having some minority of people who are hypocritical like that, is nothing unique to the feminist movement - happens both ways.

I don't think anyone here has used Elam/AVfM to discredit the mens rights movement overall.

A lot of the 'turning a blind eye' stuff (not criticizing extremists within their movement) that you perceive from feminists, is stuff I see on both sides really - so I don't understand why feminists in particular are singled out as being like that.
I've seen a lot of posters on the MRA side over time (some fairly reasonable), cite mens rights people whose reputation has been highlighted as fairly sketchy in this thread - so there's definitely plenty of good examples of those kinds of double standards on Boards.

People really need to do some (even minimal) source checking, to see that the person/organization they're citing, doesn't have any dirt on them (one commonly cited source earlier, the Independent Womens Forum, was actually funded by the anti-intellectual/denialist Libertarian think-tank network and Koch Bro's).

hatrickpatrick · 12-10-2014 05:38PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Feminism isn't a hive mind though, so it's a valid thing to say.

Neither is the MRM, yet the same feminists who use the hive mind argument to deflect criticism, use extreme examples of MRAs to justify statements discrediting the entire MRA movement. Again, it's a matter of double standards and having one's cake and eating it - many feminists seem to really want their movement to be held to different standards than those the MRM is held to, which is rather ironic considering the (alleged) aim of feminism is the removal of double standards. :pac:

The problem with what you're saying there, is you're generalizing about feminists, when what you really mean is individual/specific feminists, being hypocritical in the way you speak of.

Having some minority of people who are hypocritical like that, is nothing unique to the feminist movement - happens both ways.

Many, many feminists discredit the entire MRM on a regular basis - far more than those MRAs who claim that all feminism is bad. And they use a standard which they object to when it is used against them. It does not, from where I'm standing, constitute a minority I'm afraid.

I don't think anyone here has used Elam/AVfM to discredit the mens rights movement overall.

Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a glance at /r/Feminism on Reddit?

A lot of the 'turning a blind eye' stuff (not criticizing extremists within their movement) that you perceive from feminists, is stuff I see on both sides really - so I don't understand why feminists in particular are singled out as being like that.

Because as I said before, they seem to regularly criticize others for behavior which is rampant within their own movement. The MRM does not do this - I have publicly stated here that I regard Paul Elam as an absolute scumbag. Has any feminist said the same about Harriet Harmen or Ivana Bacick? In my experience, most MRAs do not shy away from attacking muppets within their own movement, whereas feminists get very defensive about it.

I've seen a lot of posters on the MRA side over time (some fairly reasonable), cite mens rights people whose reputation has been highlighted as fairly sketchy in this thread - so there's definitely plenty of good examples of those kinds of double standards on Boards.

Any examples? Haven't noticed this myself but you could well be right, would be interested to see for myself.

People really need to do some (even minimal) source checking, to see that the person/organization they're citing, doesn't have any dirt on them (one commonly cited source earlier, the Independent Womens Forum, was actually funded by the anti-intellectual/denialist Libertarian think-tank network and Koch Bro's).

One could, alas, apply this to pretty much the entire internet. Lack of sauce is endemic.

KomradeBishop · 12-10-2014 06:12PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Neither is the MRM, yet the same feminists who use the hive mind argument to deflect criticism, use extreme examples of MRAs to justify statements discrediting the entire MRA movement.

Ya but don't you see what you're doing here? Criticizing feminists for generalizing about the MRM, while you are generalizing about feminists.

I don't see why you aim those criticisms at feminism, rather than at both.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Many, many feminists discredit the entire MRM on a regular basis - far more than those MRAs who claim that all feminism is bad. And they use a standard which they object to when it is used against them. It does not, from where I'm standing, constitute a minority I'm afraid.

How can you quantify that? By saying it is a majority, you are explicitly generalizing - which is inherently a logically fallacious/wrong thing to say?

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Out of curiosity, have you ever taken a glance at /r/Feminism on Reddit?

Hah, no

I don't visit Reddit a whole lot - find its format awkward.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Any examples? Haven't noticed this myself but you could well be right, would be interested to see for myself.

Well, in this thread there was the Independent Womens Forum I mentioned, Erin Pizzey, and of course Elam/AVfM - it's only recently I've been source-checking in these debates though.

Laois6556 · 12-10-2014 06:17PM

There's nothing wrong with feminism, it's a good thing. Some women get carried away, they're not really feminists. Those women can be quite scary, some of their opinions off the wall. There's some men that are equally if not more scary though, extreme masculism can be very frightning.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 06:20PM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

why is it ok for feminists to use assholed like Elam to discredit the entire MRA movement, but as soon as one cites Harmen or Bacick to discredit the feminist movement, it's all "Feminism isn't a hive mind"

It's not ok. If anything it was acknowledged Elam isn't the entire MRA movement and moderate MRAs are nothing like him, but this isn't extended to feminism. When a feminist hardliner says something really offensive to men, it just will not be accepted that she doesn't speak for all feminists, the way Elam doesn't speak for all MRAs.

hatrickpatrick · 12-10-2014 06:37PM

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

It's not ok. If anything it was acknowledged Elam isn't the entire MRA movement and moderate MRAs are nothing like him, but this isn't extended to feminism. When a feminist hardliner says something really offensive to men, it just will not be accepted that she doesn't speak for all feminists, the way Elam doesn't speak for all MRAs.

Again though you have to look at real-world impact. To use my previous example, if radical feminists succeed in getting a college to ban "Burred Lines" being played on nights out, and either no campaign exists among feminists to counter this or such a campaign fails, it must be admitted that while not speaking for all feminists, the radicals have successfully dictated a change in the rules.

This, to my knowledge, has never happened with MRA extremists - can you cite any high profile MRM campaigns which succeeded in restricting people's freedom while there was no counter movement from other MRAs to stop them?

S.L.F · 12-10-2014 07:51PM

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Paul Elam, founder of A Voice For Men, has said this, regarding female rape victims (worth reading the full quote, rather than just the bolded bit):

http://web.archive.org/web/20111103174336/http://www.avoiceformen.com/mens-rights/false-rape-culture/challenging-the-etiology-of-rape/

He is a scumbag, who brings that entire site into disrepute.

The problem with the feminist lens is you read the bits you believe will bolster your case.

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

You agree things globally are better for women overall, therefore you don't deserve to be acknowledged. You'll be banned soon anyway.

But things are better for women overall.

More men are jailed, tortured, executed, murdered, mugged on the streets, die 6/7 years before women, expected to work the most dangerous jobs, conscripted to fight and die, commit suicide, over 90% of the homeless are men as well, more men are enslaved to work.

This is worldwide BTW

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

No you can't compared an entity that has killed millions of people, to an entity that... hasn't.

The ideology didn't kill them it was brainwashed people.

The ideology of feminism brainwashes people (mainly women) to believe they are victims of the patriarchy (men).

Both are based on Marxism.

B0jangles wrote: »

Paul Elam's youtube username is "TheHappyMisogynist".

Make of that what you will.

Your name is Bojangles, I assume you are black and a great dancer.

B0jangles wrote: »

He founded and now runs one of the biggest and most heavily trafficked MRA sites.

He is a self-described misogynist.

I think that is a problem for the MRA movement.

You'll have to provide me with proof that he is a misogynist.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I think they definitely do. Also he isn't the only person who runs the website. In fact the real head of the MRA movement (if you really want a figurehead) is Erin Pizzey. She helps run the site and is a MRA because of the experiences she had from feminists when trying to set up a shelter for male victims of domestic abuse.

No she is an MRA because she believes in equality.

She also believes that domestic abuse is not an gendered issue.

She suffered dreadful abuse from her parents but mostly from her mother.

She's traced that abuse back 3 generations.

Now that is the reasons feminists try so hard to discredit her.

She attacks the whole ideology of feminism plus their fav cash cow, the domestic abuse industry

B0jangles wrote: »

Is that the same Erin [FONT=arial, helvetica]Pizzey who said [/FONT]"[FONT=arial, helvetica]Men are gentle, honest and straightforward. Women are convoluted, deceptive and dangerous" ?

Yeah, she sounds great.
[/FONT]

Quote mining much.

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Oh a self loathing woman - they're particularly hilarious in their lack of self awareness.

Wonder what she'd make of Malala Yousafzai. Oh but wait, the focus on Malala's Nobel prize moreso than the Nobel prize of the man... is an horrific, feminism-supported case of sexism against men! (As opposed to her doing that whole defying the Taliban, getting shot by the Taliban and surviving thing - as a teenager).

Se has more credibility than you do.

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Yeah, you're kind of forgetting that she was the same person who's life was threatened, as were her families and her dog was shot by lovely women. Sure aren't they great? If you had that happen you after trying to help women, seeing how violent they could be and then when you tried to set up a men's shelter be attacked and threatened, having to flee your home country, I think you'd have the same viewpoint as her to be honest.

She was being harassed by feminists and had a police escort for 2/3 years.

Had her dog killed so really who would you believe killed her dog?

B0jangles wrote: »

I recognise that she was treated very badly in the past; it appears that her experiences have led her to believe that ALL women are bad, not just the individuals that harrassed and abused her.

If a prominent feminist said "Women are gentle, honest and straightforward. Men are convoluted, deceptive and dangerous", no-one here would care if she had been raped and abused by various men in the past, she'd be dismissed as a lunatic misandrist who was irreparably damaged by her past. We've had threads here on that very topic.

But Ms. Pizzey is apparently immune from such criticism.

The point is she has helped many hundred of women and their children....and men and their children.

She's a far better person than the feminists who run Women's Aid and the ideas they have on 'equality'.

FactCheck wrote: »

She has actually since said she doesn't know who shot at her dog.

That's true but really what would you believe?

Some unknown stranger came onto her property and shot her dog or someone who'd been harassing her in the past and has threatened her and her entire family

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

I think there's a strong chance in fairness that those loons shot her dog, but she shouldn't have stated they definitely did it; it discredits her.

'Loons'....you mean the people who carry the same label as you and call themselves feminists.

FactCheck wrote: »

Unfortunately I don't think Erin Pizzey would consider this domestic violence. As she wrote in the Daily Mail a few years ago:

She also confesses to having committed violent acts like the one your ex-girlfriend committed against you, and isn't the least bit regretful:

Honestly I think that while she's done some admirable things in the past, she's a bit messed up in the head and newspapers and charities and activists ought to just leave her be rather than dragging her into the spotlight when she clearly isn't well.

If she is messed up in the head it would have been mainly from her mother, don't tell Women's Aid that BTW they'd never recover from the outrage.

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

Laughed at? Not in my world.
By whom?

Who tells men to man up? From what I see it's... other men. So why are you blaming that on feminism?

Erm no not quite.

Feminists claim that the vast majority of domestic abuse is directed at women from men.....due to patriarchy and men trying to over power women.

In reality it is practically 50-50

S.L.F · 12-10-2014 08:01PM

Laois6556 wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with feminism, it's a good thing. Some women get carried away, they're not really feminists. Those women can be quite scary, some of their opinions off the wall. There's some men that are equally if not more scary though, extreme masculism can be very frightning.

First there is a difference between "Women's equal rights" and ''feminism''.

It is important to get that into your head first.

I and every other MRA I know supports Women's Human Rights as we do Men's Human Rights.

The scary women you refer to are the leaders of the feminist movement.

You can say they are not really feminists but they are real feminists.

Shakespeare's Sister · 12-10-2014 08:10PM

S.L.F wrote: »

Se has more credibility than you do.

On what basis are you becoming personal with me? Me disagreeing with what you say?

'Loons'....you mean the people who carry the same label as you and call themselves feminists.

Pardon?

I don't fully understand what you mean, but if you are saying I call myself a feminist, I actually don't. I am actually critical of a lot of feminism, but I obviously embrace the women's rights aspect of it (which you say is separate to feminism but that is just your opinion - you keep stating your opinion is fact).

As for the "man up" thing, actually yes, lots of the time it IS men who say it. Women's organisations skewing domestic abuse stats doesn't change that.

I love too the neglecting of the countries I mentioned in which women are brutalised for being women.

mrkiscool2 · 12-10-2014 08:23PM

S.L.F. I have no problem with people being for MRA's but suggesting that MRA's are truly for equality is the exact same as saying feminism is truly for equality. Both groups push one genders problems over the other and that's a problem. Attacking people who have similar beliefs as yourself isn't a way to make friends (hence this post). Also, Pizzey actually DOES attribute her experiences with feminists as the main reason she is a MRA and not an egalitarian so if you are going to argue a point at least have your facts straight.

Also, I don't like how this is becoming an "Us vs them" kind of argument. If we all are really for equality (as we are all saying) it should be more "Us for Us" mentality. The level of respectfulness in this thread has declined dramatically since the first 10.

P. Breathnach · 12-10-2014 08:36PM

S.L.F wrote: »

The problem with the feminist lens is you read the bits you believe will bolster your case....

And you don't do the same thing from the other side?

S.L.F wrote: »

...
The scary women you refer to are the leaders of the feminist movement.

You can say they are not really feminists but they are real feminists.

Do you have exclusive rights to say what feminism is, and who is a feminist?

I re-iterate that I am a feminist, and I am not led by misandrist loons.

S.L.F · 12-10-2014 09:50PM

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

On what basis are you becoming personal with me? Me disagreeing with what you say?

Pardon?

I don't fully understand what you mean, but if you are saying I call myself a feminist, I actually don't. I am actually critical of a lot of feminism, but I obviously embrace the women's rights aspect of it (which you say is separate to feminism but that is just your opinion - you keep stating your opinion is fact).

You attacked a woman who's done heaps of good across the globe and has been viciously attacked by people you are defending.

I find it hard in the extreme to believe you do not identify with the feminist ideology and are in fact a feminist.

Shakespeare's Sister wrote: »

As for the "man up" thing, actually yes, lots of the time it IS men who say it. Women's organisations skewing domestic abuse stats doesn't change that.

I love too the neglecting of the countries I mentioned in which women are brutalised for being women.

I agree that men also say "Man-up".

The problem is that since feminists control so much of the media they have made it a tough job to get the facts out there.

Not "Women's organisations" you mean "Feminist organisations"

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

S.L.F. I have no problem with people being for MRA's but suggesting that MRA's are truly for equality is the exact same as saying feminism is truly for equality. Both groups push one genders problems over the other and that's a problem. Attacking people who have similar beliefs as yourself isn't a way to make friends (hence this post). Also, Pizzey actually DOES attribute her experiences with feminists as the main reason she is a MRA and not an egalitarian so if you are going to argue a point at least have your facts straight.

Also, I don't like how this is becoming an "Us vs them" kind of argument. If we all are really for equality (as we are all saying) it should be more "Us for Us" mentality. The level of respectfulness in this thread has declined dramatically since the first 10.

Actually if you do some looking you'll see that Marxism and feminism are very closely related.

Whereas the MHRM is most definitely not Marxist based.

Making friends is not what I am here for.

The them vs us thing is in fact not quite what the MHRM is about.

We are pro-men's rights but not to the detriment of women's rights in spite of what several leading feminists have claimed.

We want equality

The problem is that feminists claim they want equality but really what they are looking for is all the 'gravy' without having to eat the 'greens'.

Basically equal outcome for less work.

P. Breathnach wrote: »

And you don't do the same thing from the other side?

Do you have exclusive rights to say what feminism is, and who is a feminist?

I re-iterate that I am a feminist, and I am not led by misandrist loons.

I believe I said earlier there are 2 different kinds of feminist.

The misandrist loons who lead the ideology and who have power far beyond the vast majority of people.

Then there is the majority of feminists who have the illusion that feminism has something to do with equality for women.

Is feminism a dirty word?

Comments