Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 6, 2013 in Feminism | 321 comments

Dear Modern Feminists: So This Is What You’re Saying?

A lot of proud liberal parents are wondering why their liberal daughters (like me) have turned on their ideals in one specific area of the liberal agenda: feminism. Let me explain. You see, we were brought up to value equality, and the modern feminist movement sounds nothing like it. Further, modern feminism is vastly unfair to men, while also denigrating the accomplishments of independent, free-thinking women. While I agree that women have yet to reach their full potential in many areas, and while I don’t object to reasonable protection, legislation, and support, the demands I hear modern feminists making are neither reasonable nor rational. In fact, the entire movement seems focused on perpetuating the illusion of great disadvantage so as to profit those women who have poured their life’s efforts into an ideology that doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. In sum, these are the arguments I hear modern feminists making, and as a human being who strives to live by the light of reason, I cannot possibly accept them:

1.   We are just as strong as men, yet we need men to escort us or avoid us when we’re alone because all men are potential rapists.

2.   We are just as smart as men, yet we need affirmative action programs in order to show it.

3.   We are just as capable as men, yet we need feminist men to defend us and speak on our behalves.

4.   We stand in solidarity with all women, yet we’re willing to defame and destroy those women who are successful without us or who dare to disagree with us.  (In fact, when possible, we prefer getting the feminist men to do it. )

5.   We have the same interests as men, so when we don’t seem interested in typically male pastimes, it’s the men’s fault for being such misogynists.

6.   We are just as powerful as men, yet we are perpetual victims. If a woman is not aware of her perpetual victimhood, we will shame her into admitting it, since ours is the only way to think.

7.   We decry sexism, but value paternalism.

8.   We advocate for equality and social justice, as long as everyone realizes that we are more important than anyone else.

9.   We are fully-actualized, independent human beings who do not ever need to take responsibility for our own actions.

10. We are creatures of reason, yet we find disagreement too “triggering” to deal with.

And yes, I know that I just don’t “get it,” but I don’t.

 

 

  • An Ardent Skeptic

    11. We believe that all women should be able to choose for themselves what they wish to do in life, but if a woman chooses something considered “woman’s work”, we will let her know that she has failed as a “feminist” by making that choice.

    Don’t ever tell a “true feminist” that you work as a seamstress. I held countless women back by working as a dressmaker and a stitcher in a clothing factory, don’t you know? “How are we going to change the attitude of the patriarchy if women continue to do these kinds of jobs? I should be thoroughly ashamed of myself.” (Of course, my work ensured that “true feminists” didn’t have to go to work naked. ;-)

    • bluharmony

      This kind of thing makes me all shades of angry. If some women choose to be stay-at-home moms, then I fully support them. If men want to be stay-at-home dads, then I support them too. I have no right to make others live and behave according to my rules and preferences, nor do I wish to.

      • cindy

        As a feminist I agree with you. And that position is informed by my feminism.

        • bluharmony

          While mine is informed by an earnest attempt to balance freedom, compassion, and societal well-being. Why do I need an additional layer of dogma to believe what I believe? Would the result be any different? And isn’t it better to actually think things through FOR YOURSELF?

          • Richard Pierick Smith

            Wow, such a great retort to Cindy and her badge of exceptional informed-ness.

          • nemesis_1

            No. Essentially, ‘ideological feminism’ today is a lock-step philosophy. It requires a permanent, static group of ‘oppressed’ people on one side, and a permanent, static group of ‘oppressors’ on the other side. This is how leftist (read: Marxist) thought works.

            And if you question this paradigm, it FALLS APART. Always. Every time. Which is why hardcore, ideological feminists will go after you with everything they have if you dare to do so.

            Doesn’t matter what you accomplished. Doesn’t matter how smart you are. Doesn’t matter on what side of the ideological fence yo sit. Question the paradigm. and you’re doomed.

            This ALL comes from our university humanities and ‘social sciences’ departments, which are inundated by radical leftists. You really CAN’T be an official ‘feminist’ – as defined by the ideological and cultural left – and NOT be a full-blown leftist. It’s a requirement.

            And that requirement, as with any fascist ideology, requires that people be FORBIDDEN from independent thought.

            Doubt me all you want . . . but go public with your opinions and see what happens.

        • Bewildered

          WE have been just informed of your gullibility.

    • Arcus80

      In the words in the Norwegian feminist journalist Marie Simonsen, “Real women do not bake cupcakes.”

      • http://tris-stock.co.uk/ Tris Stock

        So what sort of person does bake cupcakes? Sounds like a ‘No true woman’ fallacy, no?

        Just for the record, if my baking skills were up to scratch, I would bake cupcakes all the time. Does this make me a non-real woman, a non-real man or a real man one wonders.

        • Plasmabunny

          Hell, I’ve yet to meet someone that WOULDN’T bake cupcakes all the time if their baking skills were up to snuff ;)

        • Mary DeLongchamp Mandigo

          Today it doesn’t matter! Soon to use a bathroom you’ll be pulling your pants down aside a man, woman, man dressed in women’s clothes, women who want to be men but are physically women. Men who bind their penny’s to portray a woman! It’s perversion! We are going to pay a price for this abominable behavior and calling perversion a right! So who knows? I for one refuse to go in a public restroom that is labeled non-gendered!!!! It’s disgusting!

      • cindy

        As a feminist I disagree with Marie Simonsen’s assessment. In fact, I hold almost approximately the opposite view.

      • Educate Yourself

        She’s not a feminist.

        • http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/ Damion Reinhardt

          HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      • Mary DeLongchamp Mandigo

        I’m a “real woman ” and I bake cupcakes! I love being a wife, mother and grandmother, as my mother before me! I respect my womanhood! I love my femininity and I embrace it! I don’t ever want to look or act like a man to prove my worth! I fight that with women from the ERA 70’s! I am woman but I’m feminine and proud of it. I like having a door opened for me! So many men from that time that are older now would just as soon let a door hit me as to open it. Feminists sold women a bill of goods! They were and are a part of a culture that borders communist values! I for one love America! I want to be considered a homemaker though I worked outside and I’m educated! I just preferred to stay home!! I HATE the term “stay-at-home mom! It’s patronizing and frankly denegrating. Steinam did more damage to women and families. Her abortion stance was a means to take away from our nations moral values and served to justify her own immorality! I am a woman and I love being a woman! I’m NOT a man and refused to buy into the feminist propaganda!

    • Chill Chick

      12. We’ re sex positive, but we think all men are filthy rapey beasts who should cross the road to avoid us. And heaven forbid they should express or even think sexual thoughts about us, because that objectifies and dehumanizes us, and infects us with their beastliness.

      • bluharmony

        Forgot this one. xo

      • An Ardent Skeptic

        Thanks for the laugh! Unfortunately, though, it’s accurate. ;-)

        • http://twitter.com/Rocko2466 Rocko2466

          lol @ Chill Chick. Disturbingly accurate (as is the rest of this article).

      • Lilian Stoltzfus

        “Filthy rapey beasts” XD

      • Shanelle Hatfield

        13. We are JUST as strong as men, but they shall NEVER put their hands on us, even if we hit them first because they are stronger than us and it’s wrong to beat on the weaker gender, even in self defense. But it’s acceptable to hit them.

        I say this one because I cannot tell you how many women preach about how strong they are, how they would dominate in the military and how they can do everything just as good as men (and I don’t disagree) but I’ve heard of a lot of cases of women hitting men and a lot of feminists are saying “Girl Power! Show them we’re just as strong” then when the tables are turned it’s just horrible and men need to pick on somebody their on size! It’s very annoying how people denounce the abuse of women but praise and even find the abuse of men as something humorous. Its all over tv, men getting slapped by a woman, the audience just starts rolling laughing, I’ve even seen it on a Disney channel show my daughter was watching! But you know damn good and well if a man slapped a woman on a show the audience would have a dramatic gasp and wouldn’t dare laugh at the abuse of a poor innocent woman even if it’s just acting. It’s wrong regardless of your sex organs and I am sick and tired of hearing “never hit a woman. Regardless!” How about “never hit anyone.”

      • Guest

        You are absolutely ridiculous.

    • TeamEdwardJace

      Dear lord, you know nothing of feminism

      • MrPlow

        Great argument. You really got her there

        • TeamEdwardJace

          She needs to do more research. Her arugements are biased. Also it doesn’t bother me if some people aren’t feminists or don’t entirely agree with it as long as they know that we’re not Manhating (those are supermacists)

          • bluharmony

            Um, the nature of arguments, or rather, questions — especially those that use hyperbole for effect — is that they’re biased. If you expected a neutral position on feminism, my blog is not the place. However, if you’re willing to accept the possibility that many ideas behind feminism are sound, yet poorly and unfairly executed, you just might learn something from paying attention to views that differ from your own.

          • TeamEdwardJace

            I still think your arguments are biased. Did you read the rest of my reply?i still don’t agree with you. I’m not saying feminism is perfect. There are feminists (including white feminists who have failed to recognize that there are issues non-white people do have to experience that whites do not. I’m white by the way) I’m dismayed by how radical feminists and some non feminists don’t recognize transgendered individual as real men or women ,oh and I am aware and accepting of ones that differ from my own. One of my best friends (a male) and he identifies as a feminists, agree with me on things and some of out views differ (Eg relegious) but we accept each other’s views. Yes identify as a feminist but I also identify as as an equalitarian and I want equality and equity for people in general(all gender identities, the lbtqip community, children, people with disabilities and mental illnesses, varying cultures and relegions, subcultures etc) I’m prolife and prochoice . I’m liberal and christian and I’m pretty accepting of other relegions. I also want equality and equity for those around the world. Also one of my best friends is a non-feminist and we’re super close. Anyways, you seem like a decent person but I find a lot of your arguments you presented flawed. Feminism is a complex movement. Oh and I’m liberal.

          • bluharmony

            You seem like a kind and compassionate person, and those are valuable qualities. I, too, want peace, equality, and chocolate cupcakes for all. And I wasn’t making an argument in my piece, but taking a snarky stab at some of the contradictory arguments many feminists make online and off.

            I don’t pretend to have the solution to the issue of gender dynamics, but for me, socio-economic disparity is the primary concern when it comes to equality.

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Thank you :). I’m not always as kind as I should be but I do possess those qualities and you seem to have those too :) you’re right those are admirable . It’s terrific you want all those and chocolate cupcakes sound delecious . I can now see you were taking the snarky approach. I will sometimes deploy that.( such as when I’m dealing with sexists or bigots )It’s unfortunate that some of the “feminists” appear to have contradicting arguments. As I mentioned, I’m a feminist and equalitarian but either some of they need to reevaluate their arguements, phrase it clearer or they may not be actual feminists . Anyway, I don’t agree with every feminist . (Ie Anita skarkessian, of feminist frequency , such as when it comes to video games. She’s Canadian like me) I do concur with you that socio-economic disparity I s extremely important in terms of equality

          • bluharmony

            Always glad to make a new friend.

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Me too :)

          • Bewildered

            If you truly are an “equalitarian” then the feminist label is redundant.
            See this is the problem with creating a plethora of labels and boy !! do the feminists excel at it.It needlessly complicates simple issues and ends up confusing people.

            The only true “equality” {I prefer to call it equity} is equality before/under the law ,which btw is a pure social construct{desirable!}. Other than this, all pursuits of ‘equality’ will be even more futile than a dog chasing its own tail because in nature inequality is the rule as she hates sameness.
            In compuspeak, inequality is a protected system file that can’t be deleted ! .

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Hey! I look forward to posting a full reply this weekend but we both agree on callous that post was. I’m sure we can find some common ground on some points and other differences of opinion. I’ll look more into Andrea Dworkin. Perhaps I missed some points even though I still don’t agree with her

          • TeamEdwardJace

            That comment ( if sill there) was meant for Cindy but you’re welcome to reply blue harmony. I replied in the wrong spot lol

          • cindy

            Hi TEJ, I consider myself to be a radical feminist and anarchist. I recognize transgender men and women as real men and women. It troubles me that your impression of radicals is such. I am wondering if you could help me by pointing me to some feminists who you would consider radical who would not consider transgender men or women as just men and women. Though I differ in certain ways from what you have expressed here, I am not that different in some of my views and I certainly can respect yours based on what you’ve written. Perhaps I can learn something.

          • bluharmony

            I like your attitude and your willingness to learn. If that’s what lies at the root of your beliefs, I have no disagreement with you.

          • cindy

            Thanks blu. Sorry if I came off rough.

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Hi Cindy. Thank you for taking the time to reply to my comment. It’s cool that you are a feminist and while I don’t entirely agree with anarchists, they can be some really nice people. So perhaps some of you who identify as”radical feminists” have been unfairly lumped with extremists. It’s just some of the “radicals” I come across do not view transgender women as real woman. There is some post on tumblr or online somewhere ranting from someone who identifies as a feminist(possibly radical or maybe a troll or clearly does not know what feminism) that says transgendered woman are not real woman. There is also this post: http://womenofthepatriarchy.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/trans-women-are-women-of-the-patriarchy/

            I’m sure there are many things we can agree on. Also some people who have identified as radical feminists trouble me such as Andrea Dworkin who beleived such things as that all hetrosexlual sex is rape. Dworkin was not a feminist but a crazy man hating supremacist who though she was not a feminist. Rape is sexual pentration under force or duress without consent . it can include other forced sexual acts and it can even be oral. (I’m not sure if that includes forced fingering but maybe that would be under sexual assault when sexual advances are made against someone’s will). Rape it is used a method of control or the rapist is only concerned about their own sick sexual pleasure despite what the victim is experiencing

            You see, I support positive sexuality (as in sexuality that does not hurt anyone) and consent as many sex-poistive feminists would. Whether it’s oral, heterosexual, same-sex, all is fine as long as both parties consent to it , are willing and enjoy it and both are considerate of each other’s needs and care for their partner’s pleasure besides their own. the dominant/submissive sexual relationship is fine as long as both partners are willing and the dominant and submissive will considerate of what their partner may not like(this includes in romantic relationships)

            I also don’t have a problem with sexualization as long as it’s not objectification and there’s a difference. so women and men and all gender identities can be sexualized without being objectified . Obviously in consensual sex, (including casual sex) the situation and people involved will be sexualized but not objectified. same goes for fictional sex scenes in the media or fiction.

            I feel it’s okay to notice and be appreciative of someones’ beauty and even certain physical assets as long you remember they are people and not objects. For example it’s okay to think they’re good-looking or that person has a nice body as long you remember they are persons with feelings .

            It’s great that you are willing to learn. Also some “radical” recently expressed how all vaginal sex is rape. I do not agree with her post.

          • cindy

            Hiya TEJ, I read the article you cited and I have to say I think that is dismaying and even causes me outrage! I do not identify whatsoever with the TERF position. Reading briefly, I gather that they claim that since gender is a social construct, then sexual biology is as well? (And I include the sexual mismatch in biology of transgender people.) It makes no sense to me. I have learned my lesson though. I will have to clarify my position as tending to largely encompass the radical Anarcofeminist positions.

            I have to disagree that Andrea Dworkin said that. If you question the veracity of that idea, I trust you will find that she said something quite different. Her words were “interpreted” with hostility and a slander was born. She has addressed that.

            My views differ from the sex-positive. I find that like with libertarian ideas, the nature of consent is largely seen as black and white. I see consent to be much more of a spectrum. As an anarchist I support transpeople, homosexual people, and sex workers. My analysis of sex work is that sex workers exist in a capitalist society as objectified commodities. I regret that is the case. I do not blame the worker. I oppose pornography for the same reason I oppose the idea of prostitution and stripping as described as mere life choices made consensually.

            I reject beauty as a damaging social construct and I subvert it when I can. I find it serves and informs objectification and creates damage in girls and boys, as seen in practically every teenager in the culture. But it also promotes a standard which allows capitalists to prey on insecurities–and sell products into the need to be socially accepted (and in our culture, its dark side–the desire to be socially admired or superior). There is no such thing a objective beauty. To support a standard as if there were is exclusionary and destructive. It is the opposite of love. Instead of giving teenagers lipstick and fashion to feel lovable, I prefer they just receive the love.

            I support sexual freedom for teens. I would prefer education (not the liberal kind) but the anarchist kind ;-), for teens to make informed choices and learn about sex through loving relationship and personal; human connection rather than boys through pornography as is typical now.

            That said, I do not advocate control of the choices of others. If change is coming then for me that change will be in the form of people being continually willing to challenge our own presumptions.

            Thanks for pointing me to that information about radical feminism and the meanings it can have. I will have to tread with care!

          • nemesis_1

            Would you REALLY want to live in true ‘anarchy?’ In a true ‘anarchy,’ only the strong would survive. It would be perfectly acceptable for one town to raid another town, steal all their stuff, kill the strongest, and enslave the weakest. It would be Viking marauders all over again.

            Or do you think, a la Rousseau, that we would revert back to some mythological utopia that never existed? That we would ‘throw off our shackles’ and live in primitive harmony, sharing hummus and campfire stories and hugs?

            People like you are DANGEROUS. You think that you can build a world with no rules, where everyone is nice. And then when everything turns to shit, you throw up your hands and scream ‘What happened??!!’

            What happened? YOU happened.

            Here’s the reality: if anything goes . . . ANYTHING GOES. And in an anything goes world, you’ll probably be the first to go.

          • cindy

            You need to study anarchy before you will be able to have an informed discussion. Come back and talk to me about it. Seriously. Anarchy does not mean “no rules”. Nor does “anything go”. It means “no rulers”. It means everyone has a say in forming the rules they live by. It means direct democracy as opposed to representative democracy. What is dangerous is not anarchy–it’s ignorant people. People who talk about things they haven’t taken the time to understand. People whose shallow assumptions have been taken from others without questioning them. That is what is dangerous.

          • nemesis_1

            Jesus H. Christ in a handbasket, what a bunch of nonsense. I’ve studied ‘anarchists’ and pseudo-anarchists all the way from Bakunin to George Bernard Shaw’s gang to Chomsky, and I probably know a whole lot more than you do. ‘Anarchism’ is a pie-in-the-sky dream of intellectual misfits and ne’er do-wells. It’s Rouseau’s ‘noble savage’ garbage. I know all that half-baked, drug-induced Utopian crap backwards and forwards, and all I have to say is . . . there isn’t a problem on this planet it wouldn’t make worse.

          • cindy

            Actually, it is pretty clear that the pie-in-the-sky ideology is that which supports representative government. We can all see how well that’s working out. Have fun with your politicians.

            On the other hand, anarchism would have direct contribution from all at the most basic community level. Is there some reason you think town meetings and decisions would work better without your participation?

          • Bewildered

            Here’s the reality: if anything goes . . . ANYTHING GOES. And in an anything goes world, you’ll probably be the first to go.

            ROFLMAO! ROFLMAO!

          • nemesis_1

            If you were truly an egalitarian in terms of THOUGHT, you wouldn’t be dismayed that some of the people on your side of the fence don’t accept ‘transgendered’ people as real men or women. You would just accept that they have their own opinions.

            Personally, I think a ‘transgendered’ man or woman IS a real man or woman; I just think they’re INSANE. LIterally. From a biological point of view. I think that someone who is born a man, and INSISTS that he is actually a woman, is no different than someone who insists they’re a squirrel or a fire hydrant.

            To insist that you are something that you ARE NOT is insanity. I’m a normal sized, everyday dude, but if I INSISTED that I was an NFL linebacker, I would be insane, right?? Believing you are something your are not is a form of MENTAL ILLNESS.

            I offer no moral judgment on this. This isn’t about morals. Quite frankly, I don’t care what anyone else is. But I’m not going to re-define the very notion of sanity in order to ameliorate a tiny group of people. Personally, I think it should be illegal to give sex-change operations. If a man wants to wear a dress and pretend he’s a woman, have at it. I live in a major city and see it all the time. But actually GOING UNDER THE KNIFE?? That’s pure INSANITY. It is NOT a ‘life-style choice;’ it’s mental illness.

            There has to be a line SOMEWHERE. Homosexuality is a reality. It’s always been here, and we’ve done just fine with it. But we have to draw a line SOMEWHERE. IMO, the line should be drawn at people hackking body parts off and claiming to be something else.

          • Educate Yourself

            1. You forget men can and should be feminists too. All men are potential rapists? When you look at it that way, all people are potential murderers and it’s too dangerous to interact with anyone ever.
            2. No they don’t?
            3. I’m a feminist guy, but I’m sure feminism wouldn’t cease to exist without us.
            4. If someone does this, then they are just a bad person.
            6. Very similar to number 1
            7. All sexism is bad, but paternalism is a vague term.
            8. People who believe this are not feminists. I think you’re confused about what feminism is.
            9-10. These qualities don’t have anything to do with feminism, they are found in certain misled people.

          • nemesis_1

            “if you’re willing to accept the possibility that many ideas behind feminism are sound, yet poorly and unfairly executed . . .”

            See, here’s the problem. Liberals think that their ideas would be fantastic if they were just executed better, if people ‘behaved,’ if we all became more ‘enlightened,’ etc, etc . . . They cannot come to grips with the fact that a lot of their ideas JUST PLAIN SUCK. They would NEVER work, no matter the execution strategy.

            When a hardcore liberal sees a failed policy, they think, ‘Well, it was a good idea . . .’ When the REST OF THE WORLD sees a failed policy, they think, ‘Wow, what a crappy idea.’

            In the real world, what counts are RESULTS. If a policy fails, it SUCKS. Period. Intentions are secondary, if that. Take the Fair Housing Act: it’s supposed intentions were to make home-ownership available for low-income people. It’s RESULTS were a cowboy, over-the-counter mortgage-backed derivatives market that sent the country into a spiral. Home ownership among low income individuals is at the SAME LEVEL it was before the legislation, and the general public has less money than they had before.

            Fair Housing Act: Good idea? NOPE. Shitty idea? YEP. Ideas that DON’T WORK, or cause the opposite of their intentions, are by default SHITTY. Intentions matter with four-year-olds. In the adult world, it’s RESULTS that count.

            But no . . . the hardcore liberal will assign blame to EVERYONE ELSE. ‘If people were more caring,’ ‘If bankers weren’t so greedy,’ etc, etc. EXACTLY!! If human nature was completely different than what it is, their ideas would be AWESOME and we would have the perfect utopia.

            As opposed to NORMAL PEOPLE, who KNOW that investment banks are greedy and you shouldn’t make it EVEN EASIER for them to fleece people by letting them have their own, completely unregulated mortgage-backed OTC market. Us normal, everyday, knuckle-dragging Nascar watchers ACCEPT that investment banks are greedy and will NEVER CHANGE, so why make it easier for them??

            And that’s why we think hardcore liberals are a bunch of moonbats,

          • Guest

            wow, she told you, huh? You should listen more and type/talk less.

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Dude, this issue was resolved and I we really have an issue with each other anymore even if we have some different opinions. I’ll know how to listen even if I miss things sometime but you obviously missed the the context in our comments. Maybe you should listen more before jumping in with a moot comment. And yes in this case it would be moot.

          • Guest

            First of all it wasn’t “moot” at all xD and second i didnt mean to reply to you i just wanted to post the comment and hope that either anti feminists or more intellectual people would reply

          • John Dutchie

            “….Real feminism is equality and equity…..”…Really .???

            ..Well then Miss Feminists you had better read these famous quotes made by your famous and revered Feminists ….Enjoy the read…

            “I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.” – Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor

            “To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.” -– Valerie Solanas

            “I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.” — Andrea Dworkin

            “Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear” — Susan Brownmiller

            1/ “The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.” — Sharon Stone

            2/ “In a patriarchal society, all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” — Catherine MacKinnon

            3/ “The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.” — Sally Miller Gearhart

            4/ “Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience.” – Catherine Comins

            5/ “All men are rapists and that’s all they are” — Marilyn French

            6 “Probably the only place where a man can feel really secure is in a maximum security prison, except for the imminent threat of release.” — Germaine Greer

            And this lady made a very astute statement…. “Kelly sums it up nicely:

            “If you’re going to say feminism is not a man-hating movement, I’m going to have to insist that you provide links either to sites showing feminists condemning the statements listed above, or feminists telling women to respect men as men.”

            You ,with the rest of your Feminists cohorts can rot in hell as far I am concerned…I rather be dead then submit or be subservient to Feminism …..

          • TeamEdwardJace

            God, do you have nothing better than troll posts that have been untouched for months? I settled this with the writer of the article months ago and we’re cool with each other. Guess what I’m condemning all of these people you mentioned because of their bigoted comments. Also a lot will tell you they have other issues to address (eg horrible atrocities in the world) than talk about every past manhater and there are posts. Laci green from youtube condemns the all men all rapists statement and rightly so as it’s sexist towards men and she ‘a feminist. Half a year ago, there were feminists who expressed distaste over the “kill all men” hashtag being used.

            I’ll admit there are some flaws in the movement, but I still see it as a good movement. I’m a egalitarian too and spare me the “if you were really this ” shit,k?
            I also possibly identify with masclunism and humanism.

            And I’m okay with people identifying as non-feminists and even disagreeing with parts as they’re not sexist and don’t believe that feminists overall are vile people.

            Oh and you want proof feminists don’t hate men? There are many feminists of varying gender identites in happy relationships with them, are friends with them, Are married and are havjng great sex in the relationship or casually.

            I’m done here. I have better things to do

          • John Dutchie

            “….Oh and you want proof feminists don’t hate men? There are many feminists of varying gender identites in happy relationships with them, are friends with them, Are married and are havjng great sex in the relationship or casually…..”

            And many Nazi’s were happily married too ….Have a great day Miss Femi nazi…And yes that is what I truly think of Feminism…Another form of Nazism…

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Really? You’re comparing it to nazism? The nazis were despicable people, dumbass. Also what is with your need to copy and paste what I say with quotations?. Are you so unoriginal in your tactics, that’s the best you can use?Yes there was typos, but I’m typing on an ipod.

            I’m going to say this and maybe you’ll get it into your thick skull. Real feminists do not hate men or any gender identity ( and I say that because’s there’s more than one)

            All the feminists I know are decent people. (Yes I know I’m using personal experience)

            Now move on from this post and shove it up where the sun doesn’t shine

          • John Dutchie

            Oh and by the way…Marriage did you say as in been married to a Man And then the married man becomes a Father….???…Well then, you had better read this ..

            “And let’s put one lie to rest for all time: the lie that men are oppressed, too, by sexism–the lie that there can be such a thing as ‘men’s liberation groups.’ Oppression is something that one group of people commits against another group, specifically because of a ‘threatening’ characteristic shared by the latter group–skin, color, sex or age, etc. The oppressors are indeed FUCKED UP by being masters, but those masters are not OPPRESSED. Any master has the alternative of divesting himself of sexism or racism–the oppressed have no alternative–for they have no power but to fight. In the long run, Women’s Liberation will of course free men–but in the short run it’s going to cost men a lot of privilege, which no one gives up willingly or easily. Sexism is NOT the fault of women–kill your fathers, not your mothers”.
            Robin Morgan.

            Don’t you just love Feminism….It really stands for Equality doesn’t it….?????…

          • TeamEdwardJace

            I know men face oppression too, dumbass. And marriage is fine if done for the right reasons. Robin Morgan was not a feminist. How do I know you’re not a MRA troll? look you’re obviously not going to change or stop spewing crap, so go bicker with someone else. Saynora

          • John Dutchie

            Pardon…Robin Morgan isn’t a Feminist …L.O.L…Yeah right…

            “…How do I know you’re not a MRA troll?….”.. L.O.L…Guess what Miss Femi nazi…???.Try your Femi nazi feminist shaming tactics on some other sucker ……….

            “…look you’re obviously not going to change or stop spewing crap,….”…Pardon…???..So its my so called crap….Wrong…!!!… I am spewing your vile femi nazi Feminist crap….

            “All men are good for is fucking, and running over with a truck”.

            Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator, quoted by Richard Dinsmore, who brought a successful civil suit against the University in the amount of $600,000. Richard had protested the quote; was dismissed thereafter on the grounds of harassment; and responded by bringing suit against the University. 1995 settlement.”

            Here you go, above is another classic example of a so called EMPOWERED America Feminist in action showing the world the true meaning of Feminism….

            Again, as I previously mentioned…You , with the rest of your Femi nazi feminists cohorts can rot in hell

            Oh and by the way have a look….on ‘you tube’ of ….feminist Christina Hoff Sommers video called …..’ War Against Boys’

          • bluharmony

            I would like to gently remind you that the comment policy here is one of common courtesy and respect. That said, I love CHS!

          • John Dutchie

            This will surprise you .

            Yes …Your comment about…Christina Hoff Sommers ….Believe or not…..I do have respect and admiration for Christina Hoff Sommers

          • TeamEdwardJace

            bloody hell, you don’t just shut up do you. Again, the lady is not a feminist and I’ve seen the video. It did raise some good points about the issues boys face but i I didn’t agree with everything it said. I didn’t think that lady identified as a feminist. and you know you could be an MRA Troll, as is the type of thing MRAS will like to do while also being sexist towards men and women and thus are different masclunists , which is an actual good movement. and why don’t you rot in hell, first?

          • John Dutchie

            “….you don’t just shut up do you…..”…Nope…Oh you had better tell this American lady to shut up as well…..

            “REAL AMERICA….”

            “….FEMINISM HAS SLAIN OUR PROTECTORS…..”

            “..PATRICE LEWIS ”

            “….I admire men…..”

            “….Specifically, I admire men who are controlled, confident and who fulfill their biological destiny as protectors and providers. Men are essential for training boys to tame the testosterone and channel their natural strengths and aggressiveness in appropriate ways. Trained men are, in the words of columnist Dennis Prager, the glory of civilization. (It goes without saying that untrained men are its scourge, but that’s another column.)

            Men – trained, manly men – are necessary for a balanced society. They take on the tough ugly hard jobs women can’t or won’t do. They mine our coal and fight our fires and protect our shores and fix our engines and rescue our butts when we’re in danger. They truck our goods and clean our pipes and wire our homes. They plow fields and grow food. They butcher livestock so we can buy meat in tidy sanitized packages in the grocery store and pretend it never came from a cow.

            I’m not saying women can’t be found in those fields; but let’s be honest: The vast majority of workers in hard, dangerous, dirty and heavy fields are men. They deserve our praise and gratitude.

            Which is why I get so ticked off when feminists belittle men. These kinds of women don’t admire manly men who protect and provide. Feminists don’t want warriors; they want servants who will kowtow to their emotions and feeeeeeelings. They prefer emasculated androgynous guys who wouldn’t know one end of a rifle from the other. Guys who watch chick flicks with them. Guys who know what temperature to wash the dainties. Guys who are preoccupied with “social justice” and bringing their carbon footprint down to zero.

            Now of course I’m taking things to extremes, but it’s to make a point. For the last 50 years – essentially my lifetime – there has been a war on manliness. Women were told they didn’t need a man, even to raise children. The family unit was attacked, mocked and dismantled so that children lost their mooring and grew up disoriented and adrift, unsure of their biological roles.

            The result is we’ve lost a great number of our nation’s providers and protectors. We’ve raised generations of boys who were encouraged to embrace their feminine side, to be sensitive and emotional, and to look with horror at anything aggressive. Indeed aggressiveness, no matter how properly channeled, is still looked at with revulsion by feminists. Boys are punished for being boys and indulging in boyish activities. Instead, boys are trained to be girlish…….”

          • John Dutchie

            On a serious note TeamEdwardJace ,your comment “…you know you could be an MRA Troll..”…That I am not….Believe or not ,I am humanist and I do firmly believe equal rights for all human beings on this planet called Earth…

            .But when a movement becomes in my humble opinion ,turns into gender hating organization …I will fight tooth and nail….

            I will reversed this one for you…..This feminist quote of ..

            “All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman.”

            Catherine MacKinnon…….

            Lets turn it around shall we…to this….. If a man would dare to publicity state this ….”All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a MAN…”

            Do you honestly think I would say nothing and do nothing..???..No….Far from it….I would fight …And I would seriously take him to task….And I think decent most men would too….

          • TeamEdwardJace

            I’m not a mra troll /i don’t like them. masclunism is a legitimate movement . as for the person who said that, that person was crazy. look it’s cool you’re a humanist. and feminism is not a gender hating organization . I may be a humanist too ( but I don’t like how some humanist feel the need to tell people they can’t be part of a religion) I want equality and equity for all gender identities. there are big issues men face such as the stigma of certain professions e.g. male nurses male early child hood educators. can you guess why there are stigmas?

            I’m advocate and want to fight for a bunch of things including to further improve the rights of those who have a disability .I’m sure you’re a decent person but so am I. there are many feminists who I know who are sweet or decent people.

          • John Dutchie

            “. ….there are big issues men face such as the stigma of certain professions e.g. male nurses male early child hood educators. can you guess why there are stigmas?…….Please go ahead and tell me why….concerning your comment…..stigmas….

            Yes I know one male nurse who worked as nurse in my country in early seventies …And did he get some flak ….But not from the male gender or his male colleges in the medical profession…

            Oh and by the way …..I will never…ever …let my my young adult son become a male school teacher….Oh and once you have replied… I will explain and clearly validate quite clearly on why I blatantly refuse to let my son become a male school teacher …

            “…there are many feminists who I know who are sweet or decent people…..”…Well then, maybe your sweet and decent feminists can have a quiet word with these so called “sweet and decent” Swedish feminists then….link below

            http://goo.gl/9NFbh0

          • TeamEdwardJace

            I’m trying to say the stigma at least for male early child hood educators(which are teachers but different from school teachers but just important eces can be teaching and carung for children as young as infancy)

            the stigma is that for someone reason people are more suspicious to male caregivers being around their children. e.g they may think they’re pedophiles

            and why not. if he wants to be it and he’s good at it, then why can’t he? is there something in your ideologies as as humanist that prevents that>

            so you really believe that anyone identifies as a feminist is some horrible person; wow .

            really, you’re using sweden as an example. I wad disturbed by the video . it’s misandric and those are extremists not feminists .

            you know what I tried. there’s no convincing you. goodbye

          • John Dutchie

            “….And marriage is fine if done for the right reasons……”..

            .Really…??? so marriage is just ‘fine’ in America for American men

            Well then Miss Femi nazi feminist ,you had better have a quiet word with Doctor Helen Smith….

            Basically Doctor Helen Smith is publicly stating for American men not to marry ….So you think I am spewing crap..???..Research it your self then ..

            On you tube Audio Interview: Dr. Helen Smith Talks ‘Men on Strike’

          • John Dutchie

            Here you go TeamEdwardJace…

            Doctor Helen Smith…..So after you have finished watching this video…. are you going call Doctor Helen Smith a …Dumdass…….

            Tongue in cheek that isn’t very “….common courtesy and respect…..”…Is it….????

            “….Dr. Helen Smith’s New Book, “Men On Strike…”……”

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yzUECFwU3U

          • bluharmony

            To be clear, I ask for common courtesy and respect toward individuals making comments on my blog, regardless of how they identify politically, religiously, or otherwise. Criticism of ideology, concepts, and ideas is fine. If you have a problem with the institution of marriage, you’re obviously free to state it. But no one is engaging in actual discussion with you, likely for one of two reasons: 1.) your tone and 2.) the age of this entry. A simple change in tone, however, would at least get me to respond to you, not that it’s my response you’re seeking. Thanks.

          • John Dutchie

            “….. not that it’s my response you’re seeking…..”…You are very correct…

          • TeamEdwardJace

            some people don’t want get married and that’s fine . I’m saying marriage can be great if done for the right reasons. if it’s from a place of love and respect where both are equals, then there you go. you also want to know the person enough

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Unsurscribe

          • http://www.MassCentral.com MassCentral

            You can’t be a equalitarian and a feminist,,, They don’t equate,, Like water and oil!

          • TeamEdwardJace

            Seriously can you other and certain other people stop telling me I can identity with more than one movement? I’m the not the only who identifies with feminism and other movements you know. also, me and the author this article resolved this months ago and are cool with each other

          • TeamEdwardJace

            do stop trying tell me I can identify as that. they can.

    • Patthon Lim

      if that the case i think your wrong then women should be given a choice to chose whatever field she wants to work as that include house wife who are you to question a women decision in fulfilling her desire even if it was a traditional one if feminist put traditional thinking women down then i say feminist is a not equal at all its sexist to push for equal rites mean no women or man choice of work can taken away from him or her regardless if its traditionalistic way if he or she so desire

    • jefftravilla

      Something similar happened to me at work just the other day. I own a small business that does marketing, and the “kids” on my staff are just sloppy. No one ever washes their coffee mugs and water glasses, and a mess was starting to pile up. The past few times this happened, I just sucked it up, stayed way late after work (I already put in twice the time as everyone else to keep the business running and everyone employed) and washed everyone’s dishes at like 10 at night, when I finally had some free time.

      The other day was a particularly stressful day, and I had a lot distracting me, so I looked for who had the least on his or her plate at the moment. It happened to be my account assistant. So I asked her if she would mind washing up the dishes. She looked at me with supreme shock… Her face looked like I had just asked her to have sex with me for a promotion… and she said, “I will not be doing that. I am a feminist, and it goes against my beliefs.”

      It was one of the most frustrating things an employee has ever said to me. And I couldn’t even explain to her why her comments hurt my feelings, for fear of being labeled a misogynistic boss.

      I used to think I was a male feminist because my mom raised me to think that a “real woman” can change a tire, bake a cake, earn a great living, clean the house, etc… and a “real man” can (cue repetition) change a tire, bake a cake, earn a great living, clean the house, etc…

      Somewhere along the line those things my mom taught me have changed.

  • http://dpreviewsucks.blogspot.com/ The whole truth

    Maria, thank you for having the guts and honesty to write and post that. Women like you are rare.

    Signed,

    A man who has been confronted by all of the contradictory attitudes/behavior pointed out above and then some, from many women throughout my life.

  • MichaelSteane

    Thank you for this. I hold to a conspiracy theory: namely that the demeaning of “women’s work” has used feminists as government stooges to push more people (women) into taxpaying roles.

  • ManWithPlan

    Women’s Rights are worthy of support. We should preserve them and advocate for them in the many countries where women tragically lack rights.

    Feminism is a hateful supremacist movement that has never, ever been about equality. Many well-intentioned Feminists genuinely do believe they are supporting equality, but that’s because they haven’t taken the time to really think critically about the movement they are a part of. As far back as the suffrage movement, feminists were very clear in what they wanted was NOT equality with men. Rather, they wanted the freedoms of men without the full adult accountability of men.

    Feminism has been profoundly damaging and hateful to men, boys, and the family unit while insisting on an ever-growing pedestal for women. This pedestal, while women do (unfairly) benefit from it, actually stunts her growth as a fully self-actualized human being. Growing as a person requires making the personal effort to reach your goals, and the learnings that come from experiencing the consequences of your decisions. Feminism privileges women on the former and protects women from the latter.

    And they do it by depending on the same premise that traditionalism is based on, which is that men must sacrifice for women’s provisioning and protection. Under traditionalism, that sacrifice came from fathers, husbands, and male members of the community. Under feminism, it’s the same although the State has stepped in to do a lot of the protecting and providing.

    If you actually look at feminist theory, and read between the lines of feminist advocacy, it becomes painfully clear they do not believe women have personal agency and they advocate a supremacist position over men. And just to hammer this point home, women who criticize their “sisters” on these issues tend to get tarred and feathered by the feminist movement and branded as heretics. As you probably shall be posthaste.

    Thanks again.

    • bluharmony

      While I don’t agree with you completely, I find it extremely toxic when people dismiss viewpoints such as yours as “misogynist” or “privileged.” That doesn’t do anyone any good. Men have every right to speak on their own behalf. While you and I may disagree as to what the suffragettes were trying to accomplish, I find you rational, reasonable, and supportive. So thank you. I think the more important question now is where to go from here, and I don’t think the feminist movement, at least as it pertains to the Western world, has the answer.

      • Matrim Cauthon

        It’ll be interesting to know what you disagree with.

        • bluharmony

          I’ll give you just one example, as I largely do agree with the substance of that comment, although I’m not sure that anyone but the feminist “leaders” are doing these things intentionally.

          “Feminism is a hateful supremacist movement that has never, ever been about equality.”

          I don’t believe this was true when women were fighting for the right to vote, and I don’t believe it’s true in the Middle East today. As for many of the feminists we see online, I think it’s a fair assessment.

          • Matrim Cauthon

            I see what you mean. True that most of the problems stem from the “leaders” rather than the adherents – and if you ask people what problems they have with feminism – it’s mostly about the radfems position (once a while you do get a logical discourse about feminism philosophy).

            Unfortunately that’s how movements get to be associated. I’m sure there are lots of moderate Republicans or even Tea Party goers (possibly even other more extreme parties), but their leaders make their platforms unpalatable.

          • Ninau

            Has anyone else noticed the increasing number of self-proclaimed feminists abusing the privileges of their ‘feminist’ label for personal gain, even to the detriment of other women?

            I have come across numerous very selfish, hurtful, cruel, calculative, two-timing, heartbreaking women who justify their actions in terms of their ‘feminist’ rights to do as they please in all things interpersonal and career related. They wear the label ‘feminist’ with a conveniently vague and malleable meaning to suit all manner of selfish acts.

            But if feminism, by definition, promotes women’s rights in the name of EQUALITY regardless of gender, isn’t using the ‘feminist’ label for personal gain and to the detriment of others (creating disadvantaged victims), a total contradiction of that equality? I.e. these women are confusing (possibly intentionally) SELF-PRECEDENCE with FEMINISM based on the mere coincidence that they have a vagina!

            And does anyone else get annoyed when such women use the social stigma and political correctness that derides anti-feminism and misogyny as a convenient moral shield, protecting them from other people (male or female) who might challenge their ethics? Hence, if you question these ‘pseudofemenists’ all you will get is a screeching ear full of ‘Misogyny! Oppression! Bigot!’. Even some weak-minded men seem to promote this bizarre charade.

            I guess what I am wondering is, why are so many self-serving hedonistic bullyish women calling themselves ‘feminists’ when they clearly are merely ‘selfists’? Surely they can’t actually be real feminists?

          • Ninau

            Wow just came across a scary example:

            http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/10513008/Exeter-University-slut-shaming-a-female-student-for-winning-horniest-student-exposes-double-standards.html
            This girl calls herself a ‘modern day feminist’ – demonstrating perfectly my point that the word ‘feminist’ is being blatantly abused by young UK women.

            http://blog.shagatuni.com/tag/elina-desaine/
            This site defends giving the girl prize money for being the most promiscuous student in Britain because ”We consistently make sure we promote the use of contraception to our members. Our Horniest Student Elina even admitted to us that she always makes her sexual partners wear a condom. So any user remarks stating that her partners should get an STI check or that she’s the ‘Poster Child for STDs’ are ignorant, unnecessary and highly inaccurate.”

            It is frightening that such an (in)famous organization among students here in the UK is telling people that contraception protects you from STDs… full stop. That simply is not true. For example, though condoms significantly lower your chances of contracting some STDs (those carried in ejaculate/fluid) they do relatively little for skin-to-skin transmitted diseases that can be readily spread by uncovered skin areas e.g. herpes, or the myriad forms of HPV (some of which cause cancer) which can be spread skin-skin and orally. Even the FDA has been taking on-going issue with the misleading wording in condom packets, but the dogma is ‘outside of the packet’ as well.

            It is horrifying that the word ‘feminism’ is being used by women who proudly promote disease-spreading behaviours – which ultimately damage other womens’ lives too, especially since 97% cervical cancer is due to HPV.

          • Matrim Cauthon

            > I guess what I am wondering is, why are so many self-serving hedonistic bullyish women calling themselves ‘feminists’ when they clearly are merely ‘selfists’? Surely they can’t actually be real feminists?

            Since there isn’t a registration/application process, we can’t really filter out who is and isn’t a “real” feminist, and lay people certainly won’t dig to figure it out either; they go by what they see, hear, read.

            It’s up to those who want to preserve the label feminism for good use to be vigilant about drawing the line for the public, otherwise unfortunately it’s a no true Scotsman fallacy.

          • Matrim Cauthon

            Also – regarding suffrage, @ManWithPlan:disqus was correct that suffrage was only established under the full agreement that women do not need to enter draft.

            Whether one believes women back then were responsible (I believe they were given their roles then), he is correct to assert that privilege was gained without corresponding accountability.

          • bluharmony

            You’re right, but in a sense it’s fair — women have privileges that are different than men’s. And they suffer different disadvantages, like pregnancy, childbirth, menopause, and everything else that goes with that. Women are also physically weaker, so they’re not the best choice for front-line warfare. A balance must be struck somehow. But I don’t claim to know how.

          • Matrim Cauthon

            You are of course correct that women are different from men with all your descriptions.

            Although I point out that ManWithPlan was correct, I have no issues with suffrage as people were doing reasonable things, with full understanding that it was a privilege bestowed.

            Having women in the frontline has never been the best interest for homo sapiens. Until recently, children are the most important resource for most societies as they are the future. Even today, most people will still disagree that women should be in the frontline, myself included.

            (I’m okay with women in the frontline, if these particular ones fully understand the consequences and actually pass the same exact test men passed + additional psych-tests since women will come with additional baggage that they might become sex targets by the enemies)

            But today things are no longer discussed/done reasonably, and in many ways they harm the very constituents they claim to help, with many men/children as collateral damage. Unfortunately getting people to take the red pill will prove to be more difficult than climbing all the tallest peaks of the world.

          • bweazel

            I think most people would separate the Suffrage Movement from modern feminism. We already do it today by calling the differences in ideology ‘waves’. I would argue that there has only been two waves so far. Suffrage feminism, and victim feminism. What he is talking about is victim feminism.

          • Bertha

            Wow, using that terminology implies that you have no idea what modern feminism is really about and what they were fighting for by calling the second wave, victim feminism. It belittles and negates all the efforts of the women and men fighting against discrimination back then, even if mistakes were made. Last I checked humans do that=make mistakes.

            To everyone:

            Gah…I’m disgusted with the anti-feminist rantings here….but it shows me how well the anti-feminist propaganda of the last 30 years, worked; Several new generations against it, upset with it, ready to take it and put down, break it apart with trivial complaints etc…rather than recognizing those people who were reacting to the TIMES they were living in 50’s and previous generations of NO rights for women…literally, NO rights or recourse.
            Those times, the 50’s, were utterly REPRESSED in all manners thereby begetting a new movement of hyper-expression for individual rights and so on (gay, civil, women’s etc) …(that’s how it seems to go in our culture, wave to wave-of extreme liberal-to extreme conservative and so on).

            Of course political and social movements have flaws, they make mistakes. As a left-wing conservative feminist (chew on that for a minute) recognize the aspects of the sex lib and feminist movement (which were two aspects of the same women’s movement) left some things to be desired and made some fundamental mistakes. Of course! But I would NEVER rip on feminism as a whole and talk about it as if it were a supremacists movement or completely flawed or any number of the ignorant comments above. Only an idiot would say that not knowing what a real supremacist movement was. Gah..⁄€‹!@#
            Either way, it saddens me that the propaganda against it worked so well on young women and even men, picking apart feminism in such a hateful and negative joking manner, porn fools selling the idea that any form of whoring oneself=liberation when in fact it it NOT and other foolish myths that have devolved in the last 15 years…..when really, without modern feminism we wouldn’t have shite today. Period.

      • TeamEdwardJace

        Yes I agree with you that men have a right to voice their views. I do think Misgyony, Misandry and sexism are major issues just as racism is.

    • Bertha

      Not.

    • John Dutchie

      On a serious note…

      “….Women’s Rights are worthy of support. We should preserve them and advocate for them in the many countries where women tragically lack rights……”I do agree with your statement……But I more supportive of equal rights for all human beings….

      As for your comment of “….Feminism is a hateful supremacist movement …”…Totally concur with you…

  • http://www.facebook.com/snoozeri.lostio Snoozeri Lostio

    This is the feminism that poisons everyone: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4zSRkBMPng

  • jjramsey

    1. We are just as strong as men, …

    Citation needed. I have yet to see a feminist seriously claim, for example, that the average women’s upper body strength is about the same as that of an average man.

    2. We are just as smart as men, yet we need affirmative action programs in order to show it.

    Right, because it’s not as if affirmative action is never used to even out an uneven playing field.

    3. We are just as capable as men, yet we need feminist men to defend us and speak on our behalves.

    Need? No. Want? Sometimes. Unfortunately, many men are still more willing to listen to other men than to women.

    4. We stand in solidarity with all women, …

    Citation needed.

    yet we’re willing to defame and destroy those women who are successful without us or who dare to disagree with us.

    That has nothing to do with feminism, per se. Tribalism is a widespread human fault, and feminists are no more immune than anyone else.

    5. We have the same interests as men, so when we don’t seem
    interested in typically male pastimes, it’s the men’s fault for being
    such misogynists.

    Citation needed.

    6. We are just as powerful as men, yet we are perpetual victims. If
    a woman is not aware of her perpetual victimhood, we will shame her
    into admitting it, since ours is the only way to think.

    Citation needed.

    7. We decry sexism, but value paternalism.

    Citation needed.

    8. We advocate for equality and social justice, as long as everyone realizes that we are more important than anyone else.

    Citation needed.

    9. We are fully-actualized, independent human beings who do not ever need to take responsibility for our own actions.

    Citation needed.

    10. We are creatures of reason, yet we find disagreement too “triggering” to deal with.

    Citation needed.

    • Vic

      Backpedal harder: A guide to feminist rethorics.

    • bluharmony

      1. http://community.feministing.com/2008/12/09/the_facts_women_as_strong_as_m/

      2 – 10. Google or refer to relevant recent incidents in the atheist/skeptic community. If you really need me to provide a list, I will. But first, see the Atheism Plus forums and note the patriarchal structure of feminism in the atheism movement. Also, read this: http://kazez.blogspot.com/2012/09/solidarity.html.

      • jjramsey

        Re #1: You make a generalization about modern feminists, yet your support it by pointing to a sample that is far from representative: a blog post of an obscure person who — judging from the comments on that post — is espousing a very much disputed position.

        Re #2-10: I’m well aware of those recent incidents. Those incidents have involved people who could easily be described as “modern feminists” by any reasonable standard (i.e. favoring fair treatment of both sexes) being tarred as “misogynist,” etc. See the treatments of Russell Blackford, Sara Mayhew, etc.

        Furthermore, the Kazez piece doesn’t quite go as far as saying “We stand in solidarity with *all* women,” e.g. it would be hard to see her post as supporting, say, women who insist that they should be subordinate to men. It doesn’t even come close to saying that she’s “willing to defame and destroy those women who are successful without us or who dare to disagree with us,” and neither does the rest of her blog, which is pleasantly short on vitriol.

        • bluharmony

          Kazez has two nasty articles about me prior to that, including one calling me a “mad dog” for a video that someone else made and I wasn’t even aware of. I don’t consider her “pleasantly short on vitriol.” Her piece is extremely critical of two women (feminists, even) that I admire — one standing up for the other — while she’s purporting to stand in solidarity with women? Which ones? Hall should be an inspiration to all of us, yet Kazez favors Roth (who makes ceramic neck things and says that anti-harassment policies should provide protection from speech that makes her uncomfortable and from fake jewelry ) over Hall — an MD, a true skeptic, and an Air Force pilot. What kind of solidarity is that? The bottom line is that all of the views I’ve listed above have been expressed by some modern feminists in some way; I’ve merely juxtaposed them for effect. When you put them all together they make no sense, right? Then there’s Jadehawk and Benson, who make fun of all equitable forms of feminism, with Jadehawk, specifically, calling all forms of feminism other than those supported by Benson “clown school.” And personally, I’ve been lied about, defamed and repeatedly called mentally ill (and worse) by male and female “feminists” within our movement for mere disagreement, and I don’t have much tolerance left. If they’ve managed to create a political enemy out of someone like me, who largely supports their entire liberal agenda, can you imagine how much they’re alienating everyone else? This isn’t good for women’s rights, it’s not good for the atheist/skeptic movement, it’s not good for science advocacy, and it isn’t good for men. It’s not good for anyone except those who profit from it, and in the end, that’s what feminism within the movement is all about.

          • jjramsey

            You’ll have to cite the “mad dog” remark, because I can’t find it (and then we can see the context for the remark and judge for ourselves). As for the article where she does criticize you, Guilt by Association, sorry, but that isn’t vitriol; it’s just a rebuttal, and a largely civil one at that.

            The bottom line is that all of the views I’ve listed above have been expressed by some modern feminists in some way …

            … yes, in order to convey the impression that the views are all a part of feminism per se, rather than the opinions of individual feminists who are not necessarily representative of feminism in general (and who may not even agree with each other).

            Then there’s Jadehawk and Benson …

            You want to criticize Jadehawk and Benson, then criticize them — but don’t misportray their positions as somehow representative of alleged excesses of modern feminism.

          • bluharmony

            If they all attack as a group, and shift positions to change their needs, then I can only treat them as a group. All you had to do was Google: http://kazez.blogspot.com/2012/08/what-fun.html.

          • jjramsey

            If they all attack and pile on as a group …

            That’s not what modern feminists in general are doing, though. That’s what a group of atheists who have claimed to be in favor of social justice have been doing.

            All you had to do was Google

            Actually, I searched the blog directly, but using the term “mad dog” and found nothing. The term “mad dogs” did work, though. Anyway, as I expected, the post doesn’t support the claim that the reason she called you a mad dog was “a video that someone else made and I wasn’t even aware of.” Indeed, she made her reasons clear. After making clear in a post on bullying that she did not want specific examples in the comments, you “couldn’t resist bringing up innumerable specific complaints” and
            “continued with [your] litany of complaints.” After a while, Kazez got fed up.

          • bluharmony

            She accuses the “mad dogs” of lying (and the “mad dogs,” she says, is a not intended to insult dogs). “Worse, they’re talking dogs, so they can go away and tell lies about you.” Where is the evidence that anything I said was untrue? This is outright defamation, leading back to my full name.

            You don’t even have support for your goodamn strawmen. I’m fed up with you. You’ve done far worse here than anything I’ve said to Kazez, which was try to explain why the backlash against feminism existed. Because of hypocrisy. Because of attacks. Because of constant Google poisoning and doxxing. Because of mass blockings. So, stop ranting you mad dog and liar! I’m sure whatever it is you do in life, you absolutely suck at it. (Just paraphrasing Kazez, there, but see how “pleasantly without vitriol” that is?)

            I do mean this much, though. You thoughts and arguments are utter nonsense. You can’t even find support for your straw woman. So get lost. Thanks.

    • ManWithPlan

      Given that feminists are notorious for weaving facts and generalizations about the entire world out of thin air, this is rich.

      • http://www.facebook.com/jenny.mach1 Jenny Mach

        Well said, though I think your logic is lost on most people here.

        • bluharmony

          Actually, I think most of us agree with that statement. But then, we’re all different, so what do I know?

    • Clare45

      What is all this “citation needed” stuff? Maria wrote an opinion piece, not a scientific paper requiring chapter and verse references.

      • bluharmony

        It’s the usual indignation for having an opinion that differs from that of the (often male) feminists.

        • ManWithPlan

          You should just stop worrying your little head and let the doubleplusgood feminist hive-mind take care of all your problems.

          LOL

        • Bewildered

          ..(often male) online feminist activists.

          They are the self appointed know alls.The “Conscious ” men !

      • http://www.facebook.com/jenny.mach1 Jenny Mach

        Opinions still need evidence to support them. It’s not enough to just say an opinion and not provide evidence to support your conclusion. Actually, I guess you CAN do that, but no one with any brains will take you seriously.

        • Clare45

          If you disagree so much with the opinions stated ,instead of throwing around ad hominems, why don’t you take the onus on yourself to pick just one of Maria’s statements and provide the needed (contrary) evidence yourself and show it to us all -because you are so much smarter than we are. :)

        • Marvin P.

          In my opinion, you’re an idiot.

          Evidence: See above.

    • Derpington_The_Third

      Affirmative action is inherently racist and sexist, and the “Ends Justify The Means” Bullshit is duly noted.

      If you want real equality, you don’t use pseudo-equality to get the job done.

    • Astrokid NJ

      4. We stand in solidarity with all women, yet we’re willing to defame and destroy those women who are successful without us or who dare to disagree with us. (In fact, when possible, we prefer getting the feminist men to do it. )

      What is the punishment for apostasy in Islam? Death.
      What is the punishment for popular women just saying that they arent feminists? In recent memory.. Taylor Swift, Katy Perry, Carla Bruny, Merissa Mayer (Celebrated Engineer from Google -> Yahoo. How many women really flourish in intellectual fields that are truly the bastion of some males.. not ALL males.. some males.. fields that other males are also envious of)? In any other ideology, religion, political ideology.. it should be just a shrug.. but mainstream feminism has to criticize them.. even tar them.

      What is the punishment for apostasy in feminism? We should ask the independent feminists or libertarian feminists from the early 90s.. Tammy Bruce, Camille Paglia, Hoff Sommers, Cathy Young. Ostracism.

      Nothing new here. What is shameless.. is the “Citation Needed” comment, ignoring all history as well as goings on today.

      • ManWithPlan

        A misogynist is anyone who hates women as much as feminists hate women critical of Feminism.

      • http://twitter.com/iamcuriousblue iamcuriousblue

        Equity feminists have embraced Tammy Bruce now? Bruce is just an old-school radfem who broke with feminism in the 90s after getting peeved that the Third Wave broke with too many of her right-wing sacred cows. Hard Right types like Bruce are the main reason I find “equity feminism” to be problematic on the whole.

        • Astrokid NJ

          I didnt call Tammy Bruce an equity feminist. I think she calls herself an “independent feminist” (as well as an “independent conservative”).

          In fact, I dont even buy into the equity feminist vs gender feminist divide. Those terms are something that Hoff Sommers created, possibly to make herself look good. I think this is a standard human tendency seen in several groups.. a last ditch effort to save the identity of the group..by sectioning into “good ones” vs “bad ones”.
          I just see feminists on a spectrum.. with feminism defined as “the never ending project to improve the condition of women, not giving a damn about the corresponding condition of men, and not caring whether justice is served for both sides”.

          As I have said before here, I am an MRA and am no fan of traditionalism or conservatives. But I got to appreciate Tammy Bruce’s intellectual honesty, passion for liberty and tolerance as evidenced here. The New Thought Police: The Left’s assault on free speech and free minds. From what I can tell, she has no sacred cows.. and is most open to debate and tolerance.. unlike the “Hard Left”.

          • bluharmony

            Independent feminism is often equated with libertarian feminism (which is much like equity feminism). In reality, none of it is mainstream these days. And to be honest, I go much further than that in my beliefs for women’s rights and equality as a whole. Anyway, equity feminism is not what’s taught in Gender Studies, and it’s not what has political clout. Even Sommers admits this much.

          • http://twitter.com/iamcuriousblue iamcuriousblue

            I remember Tammy Bruce as being a major supporter of censoring pornography, and her break with feminism in the 90s was based on it having become too sex-positive for her tastes (and apparently too anti-racist as well). Unless she’s done a complete reversal on the pornography issue, I have to wonder just what kind of “free speech” she’s talking about.

        • bluharmony

          There’s no school of feminist through that I can identify with completely, Which is why I don’t consider myself a feminist.

    • Michael

      Oh please. Go back to freethought blogs where your radfem ideology will never be questioned.

      And it is a blog post not an academic paper.

    • http://twitter.com/StygianRainbow Missy Emm

      Thank you jjramsey … it’s nice when people are able to use logic. You seem to be the only person on this page who has figured out how to do that.

    • John Public

      oh hey look, another white knight beta male who is doing his part to not oppress anyone

      how about check YOUR privilege – im so sick of hipster, contrarian, nonsensical, childish Tumblr slacktivists and their incessant complaints with no basis in fact

  • namae nanka

    “You see, we were brought up to value equality, and the modern feminist movement sounds nothing like it.”

    ah the mythical ancient feminist who was not a hysterical loon.

    “Further, modern feminism is vastly unfair to men”

    yeah the first wavers were like totally fair:

    http://endofwomen.blogspot.in/2012/10/a-lesson-in-herstory-women-as-property.html

    “the demands I hear modern feminists making are neither reasonable nor rational.”

    if so, then there are high chances that you’d found the 1st wavers neither reasonable nor rational too.
    As many of the women did.

    http://endofwomen.blogspot.in/2012/10/a-lesson-from-herstory-voting.html

    • bluharmony

      Actually, I find first-wave feminists quite rational, and I don’t find blogs that don’t understand law, facts, or history the least bit persuasive.

      • namae nanka

        “I find first-wave feminists quite rational”

        well, they were women raised by men, must have rubbed off a little.

    • MosesZD

      Huh. Got in the wrong reply.

    • Derpington_The_Third

      I like blogs as “professional” citations. Got any more?

      The facts are, although initially noble with wanting to be equal, modern feminism is definitely about getting a step up over men. That’s not equality, and that’s why I don’t support modern feminism.

      Ironically, feminism, in trying to escape gender roles, created their own: Female self-victimization.

      • namae nanka

        “We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men,”

        “although initially noble with wanting to be equal”

        how can you even repeat this baloney when I pointed out how the 1st wavers “equality” was the same as the modern feminists. Equality where they like it, and privileges where they don’t. The difference is merely that it is much more observable now.

        “I like blogs as “professional” citations. Got any more?”

        the links are all in there, what’s the point of repeating them all here?

        Here’s one more citation, change the dates and you’d think it was written this side of the 21st century:

        https://unmaskingfeminism.wordpress.com/2012/08/12/woman-have-quietly-snitched-from-man-his-really-human-qualities/

  • http://de-avanzada.blogspot.com/ Daosorios

    Not in such an obvious way, but yes, that’s what they say and do!

  • Derpington_The_Third

    BRAVO.

    I was told by a radfem once that because I was gay, I was giving into gender roles for liking men, therefore oppressing women because I wasn’t available to them.

    Great laughs were had.

    • SnakeEyez

      Anything that doesn’t pander to their whims is seen as oppression. The fact that they would say that is typical. They will fight for gay, mostly lesbian rights yet will use homosexual slurs in arguments against men.

      • Derpington_The_Third

        The funny thing is that feminism doesn’t even cover GLBT rights at all, and I know a bunch of feminists that are transphobic.

        Sad, originally a good movement, now it’s been poisoned.

        • SnakeEyez

          Makes sense with how loose their are with their usage of homosexual slurs.

        • http://twitter.com/Eshto Ryan Grant Long

          They pay lip service to it but are antagonistic toward gay culture in plenty of ways. The simplistic man vs. women gender war they envision society to be is utterly heterosexist. I’ve also met transphobic ones, or at least ones who are completely ignorant about transgender issues. On a purely cultural note, all these PC obsessed goofballs who cry about words like “bitch” wouldn’t last five seconds in a gay bar, since vulgar, not-PC humor is very common, especially when you’ve got a drag queen or two hanging out with you.

      • ManWithPlan

        I’ve been virgin-shamed dozens of times by feminists (virgin-shaming = “I disagree with your opinions so you must be a loser who can’t get laid.”) Interesting. So we’re not supposed to objectify women for their bodies, but their bodies are what validate us as men? GOOOO TEAM FEMINISM!!!!

        • SnakeEyez

          To them shaming is only ok when they do it. That is all they really do anymore. The same ones who said that line tired old line to you are the the ones who would jump on you if you called a woman a slut. Equal when convenient is their game.

          • Ninau

            This is why I question the huge number of bully-ish women who call themselves ‘feminists’. Feminism is based on equality. But by bullying others, they clearly don’t even understand the meaning of the word equality.

          • Charlotte

            There are loads of aggressive men and women on this thread. I understand that people need to let off steam but it is largely unproductive. Thanks for your supportive comment Ninau.

          • Nunya Bidness

            I disagree. It’s highly productive because to say most of the things being said on this thread in public would court disaster. Say it at work – goodbye job. Say it in public – get ready for the lynching. And still, so many people want to say it?

            Feminism is a hate group. It’s that simple. And where the Nazis hated Jews and Gays and some others, Feminists hate more than half of the population, along with any woman that disagrees with them. They’ve influenced the courts, the workplace, modern marriage and every relationship, tearing these things apart with their hate.

            People should speak out on this every chance they get.

          • Bertha

            You are either horrible ignorant or just plain horrible for comparing the feminist movement with a hate group. Shame on you!!!!!!
            Really, stop saying stupid ignorant shit like that and go read. Go read human history, women’s history and look at how the world was before feminism and suffragette movement. It may not have done everything right but without it, we’d be so fucked. We needed it!! I needed it so I could walk relatively free around the country and not get attacked or shamed because I showed skin or was alone ( and I do travel all over the country alone).

            Gahhhh!#!#@ This is SOOOO wrong…so wrong of you.

            Shame.

          • John Dutchie

            Your statement. Bertha of .”….women’s history and look at how the world was before feminism and suffragette movement…..”…Is that so .???..Well here is some real factual history on the “suffragette movement..”…On you tube …

            “….Pankhurst – The White Feather Betrayal of History……”

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qIndoWEkaU&list=TLGUUko6WAxDCWIKIo45bvwlPo_mVA_gFG

          • Bertha

            One of the most logical comments I’ve read thus far.
            This whole thread/article it’s full of hypocrites and fools who think they’re onto something but really they are just parroting the anti-feminist rants they’ve probably grown up with in the last 30 years. Yes the women’s movement was flawed, everything humans do, touch, think runs the risk of becoming flawed, it’s one of our greatest assets ;)
            Still, like saving the baby in the bath….it doesn’t mean the whole movement is wrong.

            But some can’t see that and insist on demonizing the whole thing.

          • bluharmony

            The movement was once necessary and has accomplished a great deal. I am sincerely grateful to first and second wave feminists who helped secure freedom and equality for women in the West. But this discussion is about what feminists are doing right now.

          • John Dutchie

            Your comment Bertha of “But some can’t see that and insist on demonizing the whole thing….”…Hmmmmmm ….okay then how about this…. but hasn’t Feminism for the last thirty years done a masterful and a brilliant job of ….

            demonizing

            ….vilifying…criminalizing…Manhood..Fatherhood…Muscularity ….?????

            Case in point……

            “…..Feminism’s true colors [ReUp]…..”

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3JInPCnhyM

        • IndigoLamprey

          Oh, the hypocrisy. I’ve seen it too, but don’t you DARE slut-shame!

        • Ninau

          ManWithPlan and SnakeEyez. I see your points. They are exactly the same type of experiences I have had (post above).

        • Bertha

          Virgin shamed? WtF is that?? I’ve never heard of that and I’m a feminist. Grew up in the 70’s so I was young but I was there and have NEVER heard of shaming virgins being associated with feminism…soooo I think somehow wires are getting crossed here. In case anyone wants to hear a differing viewpoint or some actual logic?

          Ps. People left, right, jock, cheerleader, gay straight….a whole VARIETY of people use pressure tactics like that, what you said about disagreeing so you must not be able to get laid. It’s lame I agree..but not something that specifically feminists do. Lordy!

          • bluharmony

            I think the point is that it’s the last thing that people who claim they stand for gender equality should be doing. In other words, people are offended by the tremendous hypocrisy of some (keyboard) activists in the feminist movement.

          • Bertha

            I hear you BluH and fredrostarr. Just threw me off and had to rethink it in another context. I’ve seen recently from a prominent feminist, supposedly who teaches about the clitoris (only good thing she’s ever done because I’ve seen her write back to her readers comments like, ‘don’t be a prude’…I nearly jumped through my computer to choke her…what a turd to ever pressure someone to feel one way or another about sex to your standards. And I don’t believe in the word/idea of prude. It’s a piggish comment meant to guilt trip people into sex. It works sadly.
            I was ashamed but then a realization has come to me of late, causing great disappointment and agitation…. that women can and have been some of our own biggest (choking while saying this) saboteurs. :(((
            As a raging feminist growing into hack..cough..middle age…spinning from my youth in the wild Bay Area of the 70’s/80’s I’m trying to sort out what made sense, what was good for us and what fucked us up more than without it and am realizing that some of the messages that came from the women’s movement left us kids growing up in it with some pretty @#$ messages on how to approach our sexuality. I’m seeing the same damn thing happen today with younger women and am pissed that many of you are going to have to suffer/struggle through the same things because of these effed up delusional messages being put out there by people others think are feminists but really aren’t.
            I’ve come to realize that those same types of people who planted those effed up notions (promiscuity=liberation, a free sexuality means you’re empowered, etc…) are doing it today and are NOT true feminists but what I call hedonists. They’ve infiltrated liberal/progressive movements many times and end up derailing it from genuine vital issues like wage and property equality and pointed the focus on fucking?!!@ Trying to sell women into being loose under the guise of freedom and empowerment (kind of like how that guy during Freud’s time helped sell cigarettes to women by saying it was a sign of independence etc…and it worked, next thing women did is go out and smoke :/)
            The Century of the Self ^, check it out.

            Anyhow…They did it in the 60’s/70’s and are doing it now. But their agenda is totally different than truly empowering women and really, who benefits most if women are indiscriminate with whom they sleep with? …so as women go around fucking like men, many of them end up hurt and disappointed wondering why they are unable to achieve a certain amount of intimacy or true liberation in their sex lives, as well as men get confused too because the sex is so easy they think they’re benefiting from it but over time they too are unable to achieve true love and intimacy with a woman because both of them are acting on the fumes of delusional ideas we thought meant true liberation that in fact did not.
            So the debate rages on but eventually the pendulum swings the other way.
            Same thing happened then that’s happening now.
            Pitting feminists and others against one another all over whether women fucking a lot and with whomever whenever is liberated or driven by something else.
            Blah blah….those assholes again.

            Wahhh. :”'( hate that.
            Argh….back to cookies. <getting fat on chocolate.

            Good points though…thank you for point them out :)

          • Bertha

            WTf are all those weird quote marks near the end of my comment? :/

          • fredrostarr

            just because you haven’t heard of something doesn’t make it disappear from existance. i dont think he was saying it was a feminism thing in GENERAL but then again slut shaming isnt something only done exclusively by powerful Christian men lol

            if youve never heard of someone being shamed for virginity then apparently you went into the workforce straight out of grade school

      • Bertha

        They? They rather than that one person calling them a feminist? You sound ludicrous saying that. I think many of you have the wrong idea of feminism because of a few people you’ve met, probably young women who’ve adapted what they think are radical feminist ideals and then you go around ragging on the whole lot, like that makes sense? Duh..

    • http://twitter.com/Eshto Ryan Grant Long

      HAHAHA wut. How does this even make sense.

      In college a crazy postmodern feminist said that transgender men are just women who are trying to access “male privilege” and that taking testosterone doesn’t actually change anything. It’s all in their minds.

      • Ninau

        Testosterone is one of the most biologically potent hormones. It even affects women (low levels of natural testosterone are highly important to female sexual arousal – though sadly pharmaceutical companies refuse to allow topical genital testosterone cream for female sexual dysfunction in any circumstance other than ‘off label’ because this ridiculous misconception even affects science).

      • Nunya Bidness

        That person knows nothing about postmodernism ( a great philosophical field of study co-opted by radical feminists.

    • tfm

      As a bi-sexual male, every Monday morning during my freshmen year of college, a “radfem” classmate of mine and I would often regale of our weekend conquests. Without even realizing it, for the first few weeks, I talked mostly about the GUYS that I had bed with over the weekend, and I times, I even objectified them — as they were merely the one-night-stands of my 18-year-old self. Apparently, that was fine and dandy. However, the first (and only) time that I had brought up one of my lady-lays, in the same manner as the others shared, I was scorned immediately, labeled a “chauvinistic deviant,” and was never spoken to again.

      It was alright with her when we objectified the men that we shagged, but to bring in a female counterpart to the conversation was just NOT ALLOWED.

      It’s sad really, because I rather enjoyed our weekly conversations of our own self-whoring :/

      • bluharmony

        I’m sorry. It isn’t fair. That said, I wish everyone treated their sex partners with a bit more respect. Even the younger, cuter, more outgoing version of myself. I think when we’re young, we don’t always see physical intimacy for what it really is.

    • John Dutchie

      L.O.L…You have got to be kidding me….Now I have heard it all …….So you are Gay…Thus you are a oppressor of women….!!!!

      Try this one …In Sweden and I think it was ten years ago…, the Swedish feminists want to make it law that boys and men had to sit down on the toilet while urinating….The Swedish feminists said that urinals were a sign of Male oppression towards women…

  • SnakeEyez

    “1. We are just as strong as men, yet we need men to escort us or avoid us when we’re alone because all men are potential rapists.”

    So they want knights when its convenient and will trash them when they are through with them.

    “2. We are just as smart as men, yet we need affirmative action programs in order to show it.”

    Then they brag about outnumbering men in college. What a joke.

    “3. We are just as capable as men, yet we need feminist men to defend us and speak on our behalves.”

    What they don’t realize is when they do that, they are basically saying that they back all the sexist trash modern feminism pushes out. Then they get upset over the fact that its practically a man repellent.

    “4. We stand in solidarity with all women, yet we’re willing to defame and destroy those women who are successful without us or who dare to disagree with us. (In fact, when possible, we prefer getting the feminist men to do it.”

    My thoughts exactly when Palin was running with Mccain. Don’t get me wrong, I really can’t stand either side but the way the femmes trashed Palin pretty much ruined their “eeekwaalitee fer awl!” mantra.

    “5. We have the same interests as men, so when we don’t seem interested in typically male pastimes, it’s the men’s fault for being such misogynists.”
    Just another “WAHH PATRIARCHY” line.

    “6. We are just as powerful as men, yet we are perpetual victims. If a woman is not aware of her perpetual victimhood, we will shame her into admitting it, since ours is the only way to think.”

    The borg mentality right there. The modern feminist sees herself as the eternal victim.

    “7. We decry sexism, but value paternalism.”

    That is why they run to the U.S govt to put the MRA and MGTOW on their hate group watchlist. It will be their undoing since they are practically aiding the US govt to turning the US into a police state.

    “8. We advocate for equality and social justice, as long as everyone realizes that we are more important than anyone else.

    Exactly what we are seeing with this VAWA fiasco. VAWA means more funding for them and it is also a nuke to men’s due process when accused of violence against a woman be it rape or DV. We saw that with the Duke incident. They are pissed that they lost it.

    “9. We are fully-actualized, independent human beings who do not ever need to take responsibility for our own actions.”

    We saw that with Debra LaFave, Andrea Yates, and Casey Anthony.

    “10. We are creatures of reason, yet we find disagreement too “triggering” to deal with.”

    As I wrote above, that is why they run to the govt to put men’s groups on hate group watchlists. They also use shaming tactics in debates when they have nothing to back up their outlandish claims.

    Modern feminism has the west by the balls and more so in certain countries. With the record low birthrates and destroyed family foundation it will only be a matter of time before the unfriendly nations with their booming birth rates will take over.

  • Bert Russell

    Ya know, I have been known to disagree with feminists here and there, but this list is nothing but straw-men. It’s really quite sad.

    • bluharmony

      Believe me, it feels nothing like straw when you’re on the receiving end.

      • Derpington_The_Third

        Author should this more appropriately be about pseudo-feminists? If we believe that feminism, by definition, along with MRA and Egalitarianism support gender equality, then would be it be more accurate to label people who fall off that as pseudo-feminists?

        • bluharmony

          That’s an interesting question. At least as encountered in atheist circles, I’m not sure what label to give them. Some of them have refused to admit that there are other types of feminism (e.g., when I said that I suppoted equity and liberal/libertarian feminism, I was told that I supported the “clown school of feminism”). At times they’ve argued that equity feminism is anti-feminism. They don’t like the terms radical feminism or gender feminism, yet they subscribe to radical feminist theory, except when inconvenient. They claim to represent all feminists, but when convenient, some also say that feminism has many schools of thought (which is true). They say they’re sex positive, then adopt sex negative positions. There are simply too many contradictions for me to keep up with.

          • ManWithPlan

            Feminism is an amorphous emotional shapeshifter that can alter form at the whim of whatever is convenient at the time. I have seriously had more than one conversation where it is claimed that “Gloria Steinem isn’t a REAL feminist” and “the NOW doesn’t represent Feminism.”

          • bluharmony

            I couldn’t agree more. :)

          • http://dpreviewsucks.blogspot.com/ The whole truth

            “Feminism is an amorphous emotional shapeshifter that can alter form at the whim of whatever is convenient at the time.”

            So, feminism is like religious beliefs.

            Think about it. :)

          • ManWithPlan

            There’s a reason why some of us call it femitheism

          • bluharmony

            Right, which is why it was so bizarre to find it in the atheist movement. I’ve never been religious and I hope I’ve never been dogmatic. In any case, I’m not going to start now.

          • MosesZD

            So, feminism is like religious beliefs.
            Sadly, parts of the movement are more like a religious cult than one would like. And that aspect of the movement is dysfunctional (like any cult) if your goal is to address the actual problems of society and propose and implement actual solutions to those actual problems.
            Now, the behaviors make sense if you’re concerned about political power and doing whatever is necessary to perpetuate it. But that’s not really what this blog is for.
            What I, and many others, find frightful is that particular cult has infiltrated the skeptic movement on the backs of some of the feminist/skeptic grifters like the Skepchick women. So, just like the right-wing hijacked the Tea Party (which was much different when it started), we have these clowns hijacking the skeptic movement.

          • Karmakin

            I’m starting to refer to that ideology as “Neofeminism” to distinguish it from more widely supported, I think, Equity Feminism. Hopefully that’s something that will catch on.

            Of course, it’s just a coincidence that it joins some other relatively unpopular Neos like Neoconservatism and Neoliberalism.

            Strangely enough, I’m OK with Keanu Reeves.

        • Matrim Cauthon

          A group is marked by its leaders. If the leader is radical, the group will be labeled radical. You don’t hear people say Republicans are mostly moderate, precisely because their leaders are radical.

    • Matrim Cauthon

      Why don’t you destroy the strawman instead of putting one up yourself.

  • Mel

    “10. We are creatures of reason, yet we find disagreement too “triggering” to deal with.”

    Gawd, that one pisses me off no end. Feminism has gone from “I am Woman, Hear me Roar” to “I am Woman, Respect Mah Fragiliteeeee.” Oh, you aren’t fragile? Get outa here, misogynist gender traitor!

    • bluharmony

      What’s worse, is they flip from one to the other, as convenient.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Oliver-Crangle/100003079637271 Oliver Crangle

    As a man that once identified as a feminist, I might add

    as a notable case of 8. We advocate for equality and social justice, including for and especially for men, but we know the best way to advocate for men’s civil rights is through feminist leaders and feminist theories, not through men’s groups.

    And all of the rubicons of contemporary feminism seem contradictory. Republican? Not a feminist. Guns? Probably not a feminist. Pro-life? Definitely not a feminist. Feminism is filled with diverse women of many rich diverse backgrounds, and we all must favor specific Democratic policies of relevance in 2013 or risk being tossed out.

    I actually think Feminism would progress faster, and politics in the US would work better, if Feminism had a nice divorce from Democrats and would release its stranglehold.

    • J.M. Becker

      @Oliver Crangle: Considering your list, only the pro-life stance qualifies as a legitimate feminist concern. I would argue that dropping the extreme evangelical elements, the Republicans could again get women voters.

      • bluharmony

        Not any more than there already are, I’m guessing. Our democrats are so conservative and our conservatives are so extreme, that voting republican would never even enter my mind. (Actually, I’m far left economically and think that social justice is best achieved in a welfare state.) However, that doesn’t mean I have to accept sketchy claims as truth, blame an entire gender for the crimes of others, or forget about true equality.

        • J.M. Becker

          @bluharmony:disqus: I’m a radical leftist, so I completely agree US politics are pulled way to right across the board. However you underestimate how many right-wing women are turned off by anti-sexuality evangelical policies, and decide to stay home rather than vote. You’re correct however that the economic policies are the biggest reason to vote against republicans, but that’s true regardless of identity. It’s actually true for the majority in this country… but the undemocratic two party system, and careful districting, has greatly benefited the right-wing establishment. I also wanted to mention, the modern welfare state is actually not far left. It’s firmly center-left, only in the crazy US political system would welfare-state be considered ‘far-left’.. the true left, well it’s simply nonexistent in US politics.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jenny.mach1 Jenny Mach

    Dear Maria,

    Let me first start off by saying that I do not identify as a feminist. It’s not that I don’t agree with feminism, rather it’s that I haven’t done enough homework to really understand it. What is feminism, really? It’s hard to know, especially when “feminists” guilty of the items you mentioned above cloud the real essence of it.

    That said, it is clear that you also did no research to support your long list of feminist accusations. You provide very little evidence to support your statements, and those tidbits you do supply are questionable. I wish you had done a little more homework. Then, we all might have learned something. We could even have had a decent, thought-provoking conversation instead of the back and forth adolescent bickering I see in the comments below.

    As I said, I don’t pretend to know enough about feminist history or ideology to support or approve it. But I do know NOT to make a long list of accusations without being an expert on the subject.

    If you ever care to fill in your list with some hard examples, then I’d be very interested in reading it.

    Jenny

    • Matrim Cauthon

      Before you accuse others of no research, you might want to do some research first instead, and if you do, you’ll find many of OP’s accusations backed up.

  • KW

    As a modern feminist, my response is no, and I am sorry that you see feminists in this way. I once felt similarly. I believed in equality, but claimed I was not a feminist. I have since realized that belief in gender equality is feminism and also that the feminism we come in contact with in daily media and in prominent public discourse is not necessarily representative of modern feminist movements.

    Though I understand your point of view, I have several disagreements with your argument. 1st it applies almost exclusively to Western feminist movements whereas feminism is a global phenomenon and a means of addressing an international power structure which has created and enforced a very deep economic and social divide between genders. It is not confined to sexual and economic equality in a single society. Relatedly, there are countless forms of feminism, many in direct and heated opposition with each other (see Western feminists v. Veiled Muslim feminists), so to generalize about all feminists is highly inaccurate. Last, many of these points are simply not in opposition with each other. For example, women’s strength is not what is in question when feminists address rape, it is the cultural and political factors which encourages and allows the rape of women to continue to be so prominent. And there is mass disagreement among feminists on what these factors are and how to address and remedy them.

    My real point is that feminism in its purest form is belief in justice for women. Beyond that single connecting thread, it is not a specific set of beliefs and feminists are not a specific set of people advocating for a singular set of solutions. Equally importantly, feminism is not misandry. I know misandrists who identify as feminists but they are definitely a minority (and in my opinion, are NOT feminists), even if they are popularly portrayed as the true feminists. If you believe in women’s rights and in equality, you are by definition a feminist, and distancing oneself from the word only makes it seem dirtier to society at large and discredits the deeply meaningful and necessary literature, research, and activism taking place all around the world under the name of feminism in its many many forms.

    Here is a video that I really dig. It helped me understand why I felt so negative towards feminism. You should watch it if you are interested. If you don’t trust the link, it’s called Straw Feminist and it’s on the feministfrequency youtube channel: http://www.youtube.com/watchv=tnJxqRLg9x0

    Best of luck! Continue to be skeptical. And if you once more decide to identify as feminist, don’t be afraid to stick up for the fringe points of view. You will not find yourself alone.

    Lots of love,

    KW

    • bluharmony

      Thank you for your wonderful comment. Whether I choose to identify as a feminist or not, please know that I am in agreement on the most of core issues involved and that by no means do I see all feminists as being the same. I just don’t like the “extremism” that the term has become associated with. I fundamentally support equality and equalizing measures when necessary — legally, culturally, and financially. By dictionary definition I am a feminist, but if feminists choose to reject me as such (and they have), I see no benefit in pressing the issue.

      • Matrim Cauthon

        No, by dictionary definition you are known as a egaliatarian, or humanist, as alluded to by Marvin P.

        Feminist by definition are for women’s cause only. It’s already written in the name.

        The argument that feminists are for equality doesn’t fly, because if it does, then there *is* an end-state, i.e. when feminism is no longer needed because equality has been reached. And also there *will be* a concern for over-compensating, i.e. in the course of shooting for equality, we end up becoming the oppressor instead.

        Neither of which you will hear from feminists or read about in feminism.

        • bluharmony

          That’s fair enough. In truth, I think the word “feminist” is sexist in all sorts of unintended ways. But I’m still not going to judge people who use that label until I get to know them.

          • Matrim Cauthon

            Reading what you said makes me realize that I have used “feminist” in a few places when I meant to use “feminism” instead.

            Agreed that it’s important to withhold judgment about individual as long as possible.

        • Ninau

          Martin the dictionary definition that I have access to states that feminism is the promotion of womens’ rights with the aim of achieving EQUALITY REGARDLESS OF GENDER (i.e. feminism does, ironically, mean egalitarianism).

          Hence I have tried to introduce the term ‘pseudofeminists’ for ‘female precedence’ promoters (i.e. misandrists and hedonists).

          I am wondering now if even different dictionaries don’t agree.

          • Matrim Cauthon

            Ninau, I am not surprised that dictionary says so, because after all that is the mantra of all feminists regardless of whether they are radical or not.

            Official terms often have an interesting way to conflict with the reality though. Communist countries like East Germany and North Korea also have the word Democratic in their names. We hardly consider them democratic.

            When looking at the word feminism itself, its connotation (and even practice) about female-only is strong enough that people come up with the word egalitarian. So this is a problem that many recognize exists. Radfem’s dominance these days don’t help change that perception.

            Pseudofeminist is good – although radfem might already occupy the same space. Certainly good luck with it though ;)

    • Marvin P.

      “If you believe in women’s rights and in equality, you are by definition a feminist.”

      Actually, that’s called egalitarianism, or a “humanist.” Not feminism, at all.

      Also, feminist-frequency is nothing more than a woman trying to get rich off of marketing feminism. Her word means next to nothing.

    • Matrim Cauthon

      > I know misandrists who identify as feminists but they are definitely a minority (and in my opinion, are NOT feminists)

      This my friend is known as the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.

    • Ninau

      Sad truth is KW, that though you personally obviously have a fantastic grasp on the fact that feminism is, by definition, underpinned by egalitarianism, there remain numerous counterparts to yourself (indeed, in Western Society at least) who use feminism as an excuse for blatant selfishness, justified by the mere coincidental fact they they are female. These pseudofeminists are whom this thread is more predominantly referring to (I think). Certainly no one is questioning the importance of minimizing female rape, financial/legal disadvantage or female abuse, as no-one ought question the importance of minimizing male rape, disadvantage or abuse.
      You should also realize, given the above, that many of your rebuttals therefore do not actually apply to or mitigate the original arguments (i.e. referring to pseudofeminists).

      I think you need to embrace that many comments in this thread do not disagree with feminism IN PRINCIPLE, but with feminism IN PRACTICE. Many people are expressing their REAL LIFE EXPERIENCES of what SELF-LABELLED FEMINISTS do.
      By the sounds of things, you are rather above such base acts, but sadly that does not in any way mean that other ‘feminists’ (or pseudofeminists) don’t do them.

  • Maddie Hopfield

    absolutely deplorable. I recommend you do some research on what feminism really means instead of just believing that modern feminism is your (apparently) phony and misinformed definition juxtaposed with anecdotal evidence.

    • http://www.facebook.com/bluharmony Maria Maltseva

      Actually, I just finished giving a presentation on feminism — not the Blog 101 stuff, but the different waves, the various schools of thought, feminist theory, and its relationship to skepticism.

    • Matrim Cauthon

      What a non argument. If she has any faults – point it out.

      Oh wait, you can’t find any.

  • Pingback: Where Are All The Feminists? | West Coast Atheist

  • Camel S

    Equal rights are vital for the advancement of humanity. However, feminism today is a completely selfish and self serving movement. What really irks me, is not all, but a lot of these feminists are using their cause to rationalize their repulsive actions and insecurities.

    Fat feminists rationalizing their obesity, claiming the male run media is setting unrealistic body images.

    Lazy feminists rationalizing their lack of job because men are discriminating against them and taking all the opportunities.

    LGTB feminists rationalizing their sexual preference as some sort of freedom crusade?

    Promiscuous feminists rationalizing their lifestyle as empowering and a bunch of other buzz words.

    When feminism serves their interest they use it, and when the plumbing backs up, they call a male plumber because I’m just a girl and we don’t do that stuff.

    Ya I’ve seen it, I call bullshit on all you bitches who do this.

    • Ninau

      Agree with you completely. But you have missed out:

      Career-bitch feminists justifying shitting on female and male co-workers by using their ‘sexual assets’ and ‘feminine charm’ (read tits and eyelash batting) to flirt and butt-kiss their way to the top. Known one of these first hand – and working in medicine, which is frightening.

      ‘Feminism’ is a word often misused as an excuse for self-centred, small-minded thinking, used extremely liberally and in entirely the wrong context by pseudo feminists.

      I feel sorry for the remaining ‘real feminists’ out there. They must be so disheartened.

  • politicalcynic

    Actually, I would say, contrary to your closing sentence, that you get it perfectly. Feminism hurts men..and it hurts women. It presumes “all women are victims”, it presumes “all men have to be taught not to rape-because otherwise they default to rapist”, it presumes men should walk, with eyes downcast, and wait like dogs for some “approval” from feminists, it presumes that women, and only women, can claim “the mantle of victimhood”, it presumes women who disagree with feminism are morons who are incapable of thinking for themselves and must have been “misled by patriarchy”, and it HAPPILY attacks ANY woman who DARE disagree with it. (Talk to the CEO of Yahoo on THAT subject-my GOD how feminists have attacked her…for treating men and women equally by requiring all employees to go to work).

    And don’t even start of gay men and feminism-all I can say for the gay men’s community is you’ve been had. Start reading this history of feminism-and look around online. YOU are all misogynists-and because (according to many feminists out there) you have “bought into dominant and submissive roles” you “cannot be a true friend to feminism” (A fact for which I, as a gay man, am eternally thankful).

    • Charlotte

      Interesting comment. We have a historical patriarchy that for many years insisted that women walk with eyes downcast, waiting for approval by men. It is the legacy (legal, workplace, work structure, work/life balance, victim/rapist role, childrearing equality etc) that modern feminists work towards. Like any group that has a history of oppression there is a backlash that involves extremism to a point. Feminism will evolve to a more moderate movement as progress towards equality is made.

      • Matrim Cauthon

        > Interesting comment. We have a historical patriarchy that for many years insisted that women walk with eyes downcast, waiting for approval by men.

        You are confused. Do you think that the noble women back then have their eyes downcast and waiting for approval from some common men? If so, you are grossly misinformed (and don’t even get started on Kyriarchy, which is a even stupider concept).

        And while you fret about the women having to have their eyes downcast toward a superior, you obviously don’t see that their husbands also have their eyes downcast at the same time.

        People bow down to social status only.

        Women do get taught to be approached by men, and that is because – women by and large can afford it (if you need proof, just imagine a really ugly woman and see if she can afford to sit back and wait). After all, women are the gatekeeper of sex, and men wanting sex will have to come to women. And back then when women rely on men for financial support, being too forward means devaluing yourself – if you were smart back then, you wouldn’t want to do that.

        Was that a curtail of freedom? Possibly, but no one is ever free to do anything they want without consequences. If you accept the consequence, people won’t stop you from doing anything. They are just trying to stop you from having the regret that you are likely to have (like getting passed out so someone can take advantage of you) when you are too young.

        > Like any group that has a history of oppression there is a backlash that involves extremism to a point. Feminism will evolve to a more moderate movement as progress towards equality is made.

        Contrarily to what you believe, that isn’t how most group gaining power turn out to be. Communism, from whom feminism stole the concept of “oppression”, demonstrates it most aptly.

        Those leaders of communism, instead of really practicing what they preach, became the oppressors *themselves*. Feel free to checkout Stalin, Mao, and others.

        That’s the true human nature. Those who gain power will continue to seek more power onto themselves. There are no stopping of human wants. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

        That’s why even after all the progresses that have been made, feminists continue to insist that the problem is only becoming worse. They fail to see that many of the gains they’ve made came at the expenses of the men, and sooner or later they’ll become the oppressors themselves.

        If feminism is about equality, as it is often claimed, then you will be able to find the following

        1) what the “end” state looks like, and how do we know what happens when we reach the end state
        2) what happens when we “over compensate”, and how do we caution ourselves getting there
        3) how to create check and balances so we can ensure that we get to where we want, not where we don’t want

        Go ahead and go through the vast literatures of feminism and get back to me when you found the above. Good luck.

        Without the above – feminism is doomed to become the oppressor just like any other ideologies.

        • Charlotte

          OK, so I am confused, misinformed, fretful, ignorant of politics and feminist literature? Oh yes, and doomed. I am glad that you can ascertain so much from one posting. When you learn to reply with some good manners I might respond. (ah yes, capricious!)

          • Matrim Cauthon

            Contrary to what you said – I assume you have at least decent knowledge about feminism, definitely enough to buy into it, and that’s my point – those knowledge mislead you as they don’t represent what actually happens.

            People with deeply-held beliefs are often affronted when challenged about those beliefs, no matter how it’s worded.

            Your comments formed my assumptions above. If I misread you and you are actually someone who sees what’s wrong with feminism, I’ll be happy to apologize for my bad manners. If you are someone who wants to understand why people might think there is something wrong with feminism, I’m happy to share my thoughts and work on making you see it, with strong willingness to accept input on changing my manners along the way.

            If you are someone who just want to defend feminism – hey that’s fine too. Politics being what it is though – just don’t expect others won’t challenge you, and being rough in the process, because feminism in general sure aren’t known for good manners.

          • Bajamin

            Hahahahhaha, so the poster above you responds with logic, grace, facts, and intelligence and this is the best rebuttal you have? You know, admitting you are wrong or don’t understand something is not a shame. It’s okay.

          • Martijn Müller

            “10. We are creatures of reason, yet we find disagreement too “triggering” to deal with.”

            Like, literally. She doesn’t announce disagreement with anything factual posted. No, it’s about (her perception of) “good manners”.

      • Ninau

        God I hope you are right. In my part of the world, the word ‘feminism’ just keeps getting used and abused more and more by horrible women, as a justification to behave disgracefully. It is undermining the entire movement. I don’t think I have even met a ‘real’ feminist. But I have met plenty of self-contradicting, selfish women who use the label ‘feminist’ as an excuse to do as they damn well please.

  • Pingback: My Time as a Magic Pixie Dream Girl. | Roll to Disbelieve

  • Pingback: My Time as a Manic Pixie Dream Girl. | Roll to Disbelieve

  • Billoyd Garrison

    Feminist=female chauvinist pig.

  • Frank Viviano
  • Kendra Weinhoffer

    I think if you took the time to actually listen to a feminist, you would see that this is not what we’re saying at all… The point of feminism isn’t that men and women are exactly the same and should be treated as such. You said in #1 that “Women are just as strong as men.” It’s a scientific fact that men are on average bigger and stronger than women. I don’t know of any feminist who disagrees with that. Also in #6, you said “We have the same interests as men.” No, not always. Not even usually. Feminism isn’t saying that women have the same interests and the same physical strengths that men do. Feminism is saying that a woman should be allowed to prove her worth as a person, and shouldn’t be belittled because of the reproductive organs she was born with. I don’t understand the notion that feminists don’t want to take responsibility for their own actions? Is that a reference to rape, when a girl is too drunk to consent? Well I invite anyone to penetrate a male when he is passed out drunk and argue that he should have taken responsibility for his own actions. I know there are some feminists who hate men, who don’t make sense. But that is true of any belief. I don’t understand why society’s views of feminism are so rigid. People who identify as feminists don’t share the exact same beliefs, just like not all Democrats support abortion, not all Republicans are against gay marriage. Feminists are people, too. The movement is comprised of individuals, and some of those individuals promote equality and a slim minority do not. I feel like the feminist movement that everyone fights against isn’t the actual feminist movement. We’re being straw-manned to a greater degree than any other belief that I can think of.

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat/videos Astrokid

      Well I invite anyone to penetrate a male when he is passed out drunk and argue that he should have taken responsibility for his own actions

      Lets see what happens when a man gets raped by a woman when he’s drunk. If we lived in a fair world, then she should be arrested and charged with rape. But quite often the man just accepts it and lets it go without pressing charges.
      But in some cases, the sexual encounter ends in a pregnancy, and the consequences can not be brushed aside. In this case, you would expect the law to lay the blame on the aggressor, the woman. Is that what really happens?
      Lets take the following case
      http://www.divorcesource.com/research/dl/paternity/99jan1.shtml

      Another case reaching the same result on facts that are, quite frankly, bizarre is S.F. v. State ex rel. T.M., 695 So. 2d 1186 (Ala. Civ. App.
      1996). In that case, the father testified that he went to a party at
      the mother’s house. He had been drinking for several hours before he
      arrived and had in fact gotten sick on the way to her house. At the
      mother’s house, the father continued to drink, and the last thing he
      remembered was getting sick again and his brother putting him in bed at
      the mother’s house. The next morning, the father awoke in that same bed
      with only his shirt on. The father did not remember having sex with
      the mother, and he did not knowingly and purposely have sex with her.

      The father’s brother testified as to the same facts. A friend of both
      the father and the mother testified as to the same facts, plus the fact
      that about two months after the party the mother said she had had sex
      with the father while he was “passed out” and that it had saved her a
      trip to the sperm bank. Another friend testified that the mother had
      said she had had sex with the father “and he wasn’t even aware of it.”

      A physician testified that it is possible that a man who is intoxicated
      to the point of losing consciousness may nevertheless have an erection
      and ejaculate; they are not conscious, voluntary activities.

      The father argued that, because he did not have sex voluntarily with
      the mother, he was not liable for child support. The court disposed of
      the argument, comparing it to the arguments made in L. Pamela P. v.
      Frank S.: The wrongful conduct of the mother in causing conception did
      not obviate the father’s support obligation. The court also compared
      the father’s argument to the arguments put forth in statutory rape
      cases, concluding that the “rape” of the father could not preclude a
      finding of liability for support
      .

    • bluharmony

      Quite obviously, feminists are individuals, and say many different things. However, some feminists do say one or more of the things listed above, and worse. Have you heard of the Society For Cutting Up Men? While there are plenty of feminists who say that women are stronger than men, I’d start with Wiki, where it’s argued that women’s upper body strength is only weaker because they haven’t been encouraged to use their upper body muscles. And no, no woman is responsible for her rape. That responsibility for a crime — falls only on the rapist. But a woman, drinking of her own volition, is responsible for how drunk she gets and the choices she makes while drunk. She is also making the decision that being drunk is more important than personal safety.

    • 5ulman

      feel like the feminist movement that everyone fights against isn’t the actual feminist movement.

      There’s some truth in there, but it is not entirely the fault of the critics. On social media (Tumblr and Twitter are particularly bad) there are women that identify themselves as feminists expending their energy on attacking other women. I cannot think of any feminist doctrine that says bullying other women is acceptable, and yet they do it continually.The bigger problems are inside the tent, I think.

      • bluharmony

        Yep, I’m still reeling from the way certain “feminists” tried (and are still trying) to destroy my career, while constantly making fun of me for being “insane.” So, sorry, I wan’t nothing to do with this kind of feminism. It’s what’s traditionally known as cattiness, bitchiness, hypocrisy, and all sorts off other stereotypes that are often unfairly attributed to women. Except when it comes to these particular feminists, it’s far form an unfair attribution.

    • Matrim Cauthon

      > Feminism is saying that a woman should be allowed to prove her worth as a person,

      and shouldn’t be belittled because of the reproductive organs she was born with.

      Who is stopping you to prove your worth?! You mean the negative comments you hear everyday?

      What do you think people are saying when Edison is inventing lightbulbs 2,000 times over? Feel free to lookup the newpapers back then. They ain’t cheering him on positively!

      The doers do DESPITE criticisms. All past male doers face the criticisms, and they overcome that and prospered.

      The female doers face the same, and overcome as well. Amelia Earhart, Marie Curie, they all face criticisms.

      You are asking the society to stop criticizing you, so you can then do. That ain’t how it works.

      You ain’t no doer.

      > Well I invite anyone to penetrate a male when he is passed out drunk and argue that he should have taken responsibility for his own actions.

      So in your world, drinking to the point of passing out is equivalent of “being responsible”, and apparently a God-given right too. You must think that you can sleep in the middle of street in the middle of night, and no cars can run over you. You must also not lock your door either then, since no one is supposed to steal!

      Good luck with that stance.

      Tell you what – no passing out, no problem!

      Also guess what – if a male passes out like that – he ain’t getting no sympathy from anyone, yourself included. And that’s how it should be, for anyone, if you are really for equality.

      Blame the victim? Hardly, I don’t blame the victim for the decision that someone else takes, but the victim makes a decision to drink the to point of passing out, and that my friend, no one else is responsible for.

      > I feel like the feminist movement that everyone fights against isn’t the actual feminist movement. We’re being straw-manned to a greater degree than any other belief that I can think of.

      It’s actually the other way around – you’ve been had; the feminism you thought was happening isn’t, and your supporting of feminism supports the radical movements that endangers everyone.

  • Charlotte

    I am a feminist and would never dream of advocating any of these views but I fight against sexist attitudes and legislation as well as backing the corner of any oppressed group. Young women today have it much harder than during my youth (the 1980s) and are subject to far more violent images and actions than back then. They are frequently their own worst enemy by buying into the current trends for porn-as-fashion, body-dysmorphic media, celebrity culture etc. but this does not make them anti-feminist. The messages given to young women are so mixed it is hardly surprising that it takes some time to work it out. So, don’t blame those that are having a stab at fighting prevailing culture as it is a gradual process and it takes courage to label yourself a feminist precisely because of the sort of backlash that you are citing. These are the views of a few, not the majority of women who fight for equality and safety in society. Find some feminists who speak your language, maybe ‘reclaiming the F word’ book or ‘everyday feminism’ website. It has taken me ages to find some decent literature but I am getting there! As to your points:
    1. Regrettably we are more at risk of rape than men, thus need escorting. This has nothing to do with strength.
    2. We need affirmitive action to redress the inherent sexist attitudes in large organisations.
    3. We do not need feminist men to speak on our behalf but we do need men on board with equality to recognise their prejudices.
    4. We should welcome debate without defaming anyone. Feminism is a path as well as a destination and we have a duty to educate others appropriately to their level of consciousness.
    5. SOMETIMES we have the same interests as men and should not be prevented from following them.
    6. Interesting – being a ‘victim’ is an effective anti-feminist strategy and hard to give up, some encouragement here! Women can behave as anti-feminist as men and need help to break the habit.
    7.It’s great when someone takes over and makes good decisions on your behalf – if you are a child. This issue is about being grown up and taking responsibility for your own life.
    8. We meet huge egos in all walks of life. This will only increase with the current crop of over-praised children.
    9. Thinking that you are actualised would define you as not…the more you know, the more you know you don’t know!
    10. We are creatures of both reason and emotion.
    Don’t give up. There are loads of reasonable feminists out there but what we are lacking a label!!

    • Matrim Cauthon

      (note – The “you” below is a figure of speech; I don’t know you personally, so this really isn’t about you personally)

      1 – if you are as strong as men, you won’t be at more risk than men for rape, period. If you are, you are simply not as strong.

      2 – why don’t you start your own business? No possible discrimination then. All real men start their own businesses. Aren’t you claiming to be as strong as men?

      3 – Do you mean you need some lap dogs who won’t disagree with you? I thought you are all looking for real-men. Guess what – real men agree only to logics and reasons, not at your whims.

      4 – Of course you should, but theory ain’t no reality – in reality you call anyone disagreeing with you as hate groups

      5 – Whether or not you WANT to follow your desire has VERY LITTLE to do with whether or not you’ll succeed. Society just help you arriving at the shortcut to save you pain, and it’s often right, though it certainly can be wrong. If you are one of those society make mistakes on, nothing can stop you anyways, like Amelia Earhart. She doesn’t get all uppity about discrimination. She just does it. If you are stopped because society, you ain’t no Amelia Earhart.

      6 – I disagree that victimization is an “anti-feminist” strategy, because if so, all feminists are by-definition non-feminists!

      7 – Responsibility? It means dealing with consequences instead of complaining the world is just not fair and ask everyone else to pay for it. If you want to raise kids on your own – it means just that – on your own. Not with asking the government to chase down that dead beat father that you should not have been sleeping with in the first place, let along try to raise his child, and not let him have visiting rights.

      BTW – I agree that men, deadbeat or not, should help with raising children. But not if the woman negates his right to agree to his fatherhood with unilateral decision. Sure it’s women’s body, but kids belong to both parents, not just one, and bringing children to the world with an parent who don’t want them is just the cruelest punishment possible to the kids. Yes, women are being irresponsible when deciding to raise kids themselves by denying them fathers. And also getting divorce because they are bored.

      8 – With the club feminism wields on politics, this is hardly just a problem of “overly-spoiled” children. This is a problem that affect everyone else with strong negative consequences. It’s never a good idea to give spoiled children clubs.

      9 – So? Does that (not self-actualizing yet) negate the fact that you should take responsibility for your decisions (such as… raising the kids “on your own”)?

      10 – While you state the “truth”, in practice feminisms are much more about emotions than reasons, as in that it appeals to fear of females that they are “oppressed”.

      Try again.

      • Erik Hiebert

        It’s all about social status, from the best of my understanding. Feminists always thought that there should be no difference between men and women in the workplace – women should have the high paying jobs (but let’s take a look at how many women decided to go work in mines). Fact is, traditional gender roles weren’t made to oppress women, they existed as they were because it was the best way that society functioned. Men were better in most-all fields of work (granted now there are many fields that didn’t exist in less sophisticated times, many of which men and women are equally as good and some of which women are better at) while women maintained their “God-given” role of caretaker. People will argue on this point until the end of the time, no doubt, but I don’t doubt in the slightest that women are wired to be better at caretaking and men wired to be focused on the gears and how to get something done (a view which doesn’t apply to childcare, you can’t just “get it done”).

        The feminist movement wanted equal rights for women, but not equal responsibilities. They wanted women to have the same (better) opportunity as men at glamorous, high-paying careers to pursue the same interests that men had, while completely ignoring that they also have the opportunity to not work at all (since a man is still a provider, while a woman can be a provider or a caretaker or a housewife), and men in the workplace isn’t a privilege for men, it’s the responsibility tied to their social status. The illusion of opportunity was basically just capitalism. Every man had to work, most of them working labour intensive or crappy jobs, while some were lucky enough to get in better positions (just as now some people make minimum wage while few make millions). Feminists pushed for women to be in the high-up positions – need more doctors, lawyers, marketers, CEOs, etc. And if a particular woman can’t get into a field of her choice, it’s because the educational or economic systems are sexist and unequal – it’s not that she just isn’t good enough like the plethora of men who were garbage men, working in mines, construction etc. “We’re women, and are just as good as men and deserve all the same opportunities as men. Though we’re also different from men and have needs that have to be taken into account.” So change the environment to suit them and give them all opportunities, rather than taking on the responsibilities needed to achieve the opportunities the same way men do.

        In general there just seems to be a sense of self-entitlement about the movement. Ignoring differences between the genders when it comes to how we’re wired, and only focusing on what they want, not actually on equality. I think there’s a difference between equality and raw data though. Yeah, there’re more men in the workplace. But there’re also more women who don’t want to be in the workplace than men. But those women are regarded as empowering men, being a slave to the system and feminists hate them, right?

        In terms of things like raping, that’s not a matter of gender equality. The men who rape have something wrong with them, those are the sociopaths and the likes. There’s suddenly something wrong with teaching girls/young women standards and steps to take to avoid being taken advantage of? The men who rape don’t rape just because someone didn’t tell them not to. That’s an attitude of being unwilling to change, and feeling like you should be able to act however you want rather than being aware of the environment and how things function and adapting to it. Obviously it’d be great if there weren’t rapists, but that’s just not an equality issue… that’s an issue with people who aren’t right in the head and nothing about the feminist movement is going to change that.

        I’m not stating these as factual data, as I don’t know everything there is to know on the topic and am here to learn about it, so please don’t hesitate to correct me if something I’ve said is out of line/off the mark.

        And that’s not to say that everything the feminist movement generally stands for is crap, as I said I’m still learning about it. So I apologize if I come off that way, I do have a very sour taste in my mouth after living with my mother who sits on her ass all day watching Netflix and bitching about the news and claiming the only way a woman can make a difference is who she votes for and how she spends her money, because men are so oppressive and are perceived as powerful (but she fails to provide any sort of example).

        • Matrim Cauthon

          You are pretty much right on.

          Feminism has its roots derived from biology in that females must take precedence over males. This makes biological sense since females are the limiting factor for specie propagation.

          I actually don’t fault them for wanting that – we are actually all programmed for that. But dealing with entitled people certainly isn’t pleasant.

          But they sure did a hell of job rewriting history to fit their narratives.

          Any feminism 101 starts with Patriarchy, which is roughly defined as the systemic way the society is setup to advantage men and to disadvantage women (Some radfems might really actually believe that there is an underground secret society of men where men regularly convene to conspire how to make women’s life more miserable).

          This is “self evident” since we see that men are comprised of “important positions”; that women can’t own property nor have jobs before, etc.

          Because it’s to “verify” with eyes, few people dig deeper to understand what actually cause things the way it is. Adding an emotional narrative that women are vulnerable to men on top, viola, it makes one a misogynist if one is ever raising voice talking to a woman now.

          The facts are

          – women couldn’t have jobs before, because “desk jobs” is a modern invention. Back then it’s all rough manual jobs, where a weaker man will have problems too.

          – women couldn’t have reproductive freedom before, because there weren’t effective contraceptives before. Feminists rewrites it as their revolution made it possible; no, technology made it possible.

          – women didn’t have educations before, because *most people* didn’t have educations before; educations back then were expensive. And giving women education meant a poor investment decision for the family back then when the budget were much tighter, since it’d be the son who need to get the job to support the family.

          – Without effective contraceptives, women were basically beholden to pregnancy. As a matter of fact, childbirth used to be really, really dangerous, and many women did die from it. Contrary to what the narratives are, women were protected from the actually available jobs back then in order not to add more risks to them.

          – Without effective contraceptives, women policed sexual availability themselves much harder than men. Condemnation of sluts pretty much all came from women (which men wouldn’t want free sex?); it’s only natural since being sexually available (without commitment from the other side) was a very stupid thing to do then.

          – Although women were/are the limiting factor for societal propagation, without sufficient resources, women/children would have been starved to death. And that’s where men came in. Men provided the resources to make all these possible.

          It might be nice to say that women “should own” those resources, but they didn’t earn it, and saying what someone else earn belongs to you is… shall we say, sounds like slavery, and most “free men” won’t stand for it.

          This is where the smart women in the past realized that artful communication worked better with men than outright coercion. Tell the men that they are the head of household means they’ll go out to earn more for their household!

          Obviously that communication skill is becoming a lost art in an ever-more entitled population.

          – Women object to men holding power, never mind that behind every man holding power, there is a woman there and benefit from it.

          I could go on, but sufficient to say that Patriarchy is a made-up concept, even to women’s own detriment – your example of rape is perfectly apt; they are pushing for an extremely ineffective solution – teaching men don’t rape (as if most men didn’t already know), while ignoring the cold hard truth that there are bad people out there, and continue to put women in danger by thinking that they do not have to look across the streets before crossing.

          Do feminism movement bring any good? In general, people will say that feminism rights injustices of gender inequality, but given the sample misrepresentations I listed above, I’m almost inclined to say that if any good came out, it’s mostly due to being at the right place at the right time – like the sheer luck of running into effective contraceptives being invented.

          A broken clock is right twice a day.

          Rewriting history though – that’s hallmarks of political demagogues.

          • http://teethofthebuzzsaw.blogspot.com/ Leo Buzalsky

            Rewriting history??? You realize that child labor existed in the past, right?
            https://www.google.com/search?q=child+miners&client=firefox-a&hs=PG0&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=8H36UpKxCuPSyAHu6ICADA&ved=0CCkQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=1096

            Yeah, those pictures do a good job of displaying who the “political demagogue” is here.

            There are some other face-palm worthy moments besides just this.

            “since it’d be the son who need to get the job to support the family.”

            Yeah, and why is that?

            “Contrary to what the narratives are, women were protected from the
            actually available jobs back then in order not to add more risks to
            them.”

            Again. Child labor. If you claim that the reality was to protect women from risk, you’re really going to need to back that up with some pretty strong evidence. Evidence that would also need to explain this apparent inconsistency of protecting women while gleefully throwing children in to harm’s way. The best I figure you could say is the children were primarily boys.

            “but they didn’t earn it, and saying what someone else earn belongs to
            you is… shall we say, sounds like slavery, and most “free men” won’t
            stand for it.”

            Wow. That really makes me angry. Yep, there I am, getting all emotional instead of reasonable! Or can I be both? Your narrative would seem to suggest not. But I’ll try!
            The large problem in all of this is how you gleefully ignore women having this task of “societal propagation” and apparently this “earns” them…nothing. Absolutely nothing. From the way you tell it, they should be thankful for the food they get.
            Just. Wow. I really don’t know how to argue against that. I mean if you can seriously believe that “societal propagation” is an important task, yet “earns” one very little for carrying out that task… No, I just think from the postings I’ve seen that you’re too impervious to reason to argue with. And, of course, you’ll now go and write this off as evidence that feminists can’t handle disagreement.

      • http://teethofthebuzzsaw.blogspot.com/ Leo Buzalsky

        1. You, as well as the author of this post, need to prove this premise that strength has a 1-to-1 correlation with risk of rape. I reject it. Since it’s your claim, you have the burden of proof.

        2. Because everyone can just go and start a business? Not buying it. I guess this means there is a very small population of “real men,” too. I wasn’t able to find a statistic I recall being in the news recently, but most people aren’t business owners. (I saw one source that suggested about 7% are, but couldn’t verify for accuracy.)

        3. Yeah, let’s talk about “logics (sic) and reasons (sic)” all the while making a “No True Scotsman” fallacy. Priceless.

        4. Citation needed.

        5. And anecdotes! Yes, you are demonstrating yourself to be a real model for “logics and reasons.” /snark

        6. Citation needed.

        7. So many problems here, I don’t know where to start.
        A. What if you don’t want to raise your kids on your own? Your “agreement” here that men should help with raising children doesn’t do anything about reality. Oh, I see…in your “reality” there is no such thing. Women, apparently, don’t get divorced from being in loveless relationships (or maybe they’re supposed to just deal with it) or, worse, abusive husbands. I guess those don’t exist. Yet, somehow, you seem to admit deadbeat dads do. That’s not a total contradiction, but it’s not entirely consistent, either.
        B. Are you saying that if the world isn’t fair, that women are supposed to put up and shut up?
        C. What is certainly contradictory is this claim that responsibility is “dealing with consequences,” yet you object to “asking the government to chase down that dead beat father.” Apparently, he doesn’t have to take responsibility. Apparently, it is all the woman’s fault for sleeping with him. That it takes two to tango goes ignored.

        8. WTF? Coherency doesn’t seem to be a strong point of yours.

        9. I think you have your numbers out of line.

        10. If your comment is any example about what you think “reason” is…then, sure, in your mind, where up is down and left is right, this probably does seem true.

  • ModernWoman

    It makes me very happy to learn that I’m not the only woman on
    this planet who thinks that we are facing a ”war” of women against men in all
    they say, do, think or believe. If I got married every time that men (joking
    but still) proposed to me, just because I said that I am not a feminist (or
    that I’m an antifeminist) I would be in jail for being a multiple bigamist. I
    believe this explains men’s feelings about feminism and feminists. Nowadays’
    (radical) feminists don’t seem to realize that they are doing a lot of
    harm to both genders and their future
    relationships. Men and women were created different for a reason, they differ
    in many things and this is what it makes them both so beautiful. I believe in
    the beauty of both genders, if you are like me I invite you to check out my web
    page: http://www.modernwoman.biz/homepage.html

  • julia_disqus

    12. We complain about lack of women in male dominant fields, but teach women to be hypersensitive and intolerant to “men culture”.

    13. We require movies and books to provide us with strong female characters. But in real life we expect women to be neurotic and hysterical (imagine the main character of Gravity calling Houston “help! he says ‘pretty blue eyes’, he’s harassing me!”). If someone encourages a women to move on, they are “victim blaming”. We treat women like little children who can only play heroes.

    14. We are equal to men, yet we enforce double standards. A woman can engage into an activity without thinking (like joking about sex or touching a man) then cry harassment when a man does the same.

    15. We criticize gender stereotypes, but introduce plenty of our own. We want freedom and happiness, but instill fear and anxiety on people (such as “rape culture”).

    17. We vouch for diversity, but treat minority women and women around the world with arrogance, deciding for them what they want and putting ourselves in the position of “educating” them.

    This is my impression from feminist media, feminist blogs, self-proclaimed feminist leaders etc. Maria’s list is pretty accurate describing it. I would call it “hysterical feminism” as the authors are more interested in getting emotions and attention, playing drama then anything else. There are probably many academic and closet feminists thinking rationally but it’s not what popularized these days.

    • bluharmony

      I agree with all of the above. It’s so stupid, isn’t it? While I can acknowledge that there’s a problem, I can’t possibly agree that this is the right solution.The women I know are better, smarter, and more capable than this.

    • julia_disqus

      More…

      18. We want men to offer us career opportunities and promotions, recognize our potential and achievements, but we’ve made ourselves unapproachable and difficult to deal with. Men are not comfortable being around us, talking to us, hiring us, including us into their circles as we might accuse them of harassment for any silly joke. And it backfires on us…

    • Benjamin is a Dumbass

      “(imagine the main character of Gravity calling Houston “help! he says ‘pretty blue eyes’, he’s harassing me!”)”

      Choked on my drink laughing.

  • AlexisMedici

    These are all the problems I’ve ever had with modern feminism in my entire life. Cleanly, consicesly laid out. It’s relieving to know there are other young women who feel the same way, as I am constantly ostracized for trying to express these views. Thank you.

  • Matthew Brendley

    People know that feminists hate men. But they just don’t want to admit it because know one takes feminism seriously anymore. GOD I LOVE AMERICA

  • JD

    Thanks for writing this post, it is a refreshing read. As a white male from a middle class background whenever I point out these things modern feminists love it. It fuels their victimhood complex and confirms in their own minds that everything they believe is right. Quite convenient really.

  • http://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat/videos Astrokid

    An interesting review of a book from 1996, by dissident Canadian feminist Donna LaFramboise. Princess And The Window: A New Gender Morality
    Its amazing how there is nothing new under the sun, and you can learn pretty much everything by reading history and other people’s experiences.

  • Kaitlin Powell

    Im so glad to see that someone else see’s this! Please can we go for humanist or equalist? There are many shades to feminism, but the feminist group is way too radical.

  • http://teethofthebuzzsaw.blogspot.com/ Leo Buzalsky

    I now see this is an old post and I ended up here because it was listed under the “popular” tab, but I’ll comment anyway…

    “as a human being who strives to live by the light of reason” Have you ever heard that bit about a lie repeated often enough becomes truth? Based on the rest of your post, which is riddled with straw men and faulty premises, this seems to be little more than ego stroking as you don’t seem to be striving very damn hard.

    1. First, who says women are just as strong as men? At least in a physical sense? You may be taking the word “strong” a bit too literally. Second, even if women were generally as physically strong as men, what does this have to do with concerns over being raped? There is a non sequitur in the premise.

    2. What’s the problem here? This presumes that people are always paying attention. I suppose segregated water fountains are just a myth, too. Or do you think black people aren’t as smart as white people?

    3. Says who? (Take in to consideration that anecdotes =/= evidence.)

    4. Again, says who? Particularly this “all” part? Or is it that we stand in solidarity with those who want to stand in solidarity. It’s kind of hard to stand in solidarity with people who don’t want to, you know. This should have been obvious.

    5. You seem to be taking a generalization here and then criticizing it for not fitting on a case-by-case basis. I’m having to strongly resist head-desking here.

    6. I suspect I may actually have an idea of what you’re talking about here. Seems to be nothing more than a repeat of 4, though. And is likely using a very broad definition of the word “shame,” which is easy to do given the subjective nature of the word.

    7. Huh? I had to Google that and Wikipedia makes a point of not confusing it with patriarchy. That may potentially be what is happening here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paternalism

    8. Right. Because it totally makes sense to be part of a group and then put more stress on some other issue…oh, wait. No, it doesn’t. Seriously, the same could often be said about any group. Duh. They’re going to put their issue at the forefront.

    9. The BS seems to be getting really deep here. Care to share any examples? This better not be going down a road like women need to take responsibility of dressing “appropriately” so they don’t get raped.

    10. Well, when the disagreement is as thoughtful as this…yeah, I about need some aspirin from the headache all the irrationality is causing me.

    • bluharmony

      First of all, I suggest looking up the word “hyperbole” in the dictionary. It may help you understand the tone this was written in. You should also make yourself familiar with several years of history surrounding the incident known as “Elevatorgate” and its aftermath. After that, your response might have some relevance.
      1. There’s a link provided in the comments. It’s also somewhere in Wiki, in reference to how men are only physically stronger because of how they’re raised, not because of genetics. None of this means that rape is ever justified or excused.
      2. I’m pro-affirmative action. But my numbers have always been high enough to get into the schools where I applied without it. In other words, I think diversity is the goal here, but I have no clue is the genders are identical when it comes to all cognitive tasks. The evidence seems to show that they’re not, but there are many exceptions to this.
      3. I’m not going to name names at this point. But if I were to give you the examples you seek, it would not only be evidence of the fact that someone said this, it would be proof.
      4. Again, this has been done so often, that it disgusts me. People, including feminists, should not be defaming others. Stand in solidarity with whomever you wish, leave the defamation and shaming at home.
      5. If you haven’t read these accounts, why comment? Or have you seen everything feminists have ever written? Because I’m certainly not talking about all feminists in this piece.
      6. Power and interests are two different things.
      7. This has to do with incidents where specific feminists hid behind powerful men instead of defending their own actions. It also has to do with when powerful men decided to tell others how to talk to women, what women like, and so on. For instance, a man should not get on an elevator with a woman alone, or should cross the street if he sees a woman on his side. This is patronizing and paternalistic. And no, I’m not confusing it with patriarchy; you’re the one doing that.
      8. If your group’s not about equality, then don’t say that it is. Feminism is about women’s rights. There’s nothing wrong with advocating for women’s rights, and I do so frequently. Sometimes this means equality (in the Middle East, for example) and someones it means a form of temporary entitlement to achieve a greater good (affirmative action, for example). What’s wrong with being honest, anyway?
      9. No. They but they abound, and if you were familiar with modern feminism, you’d be as aware of them as the other commenters here.
      10. Claiming that every disagreement is “triggering” effectively silences all discussion on certain issues. If you think this is a good thing, I pity you. Further, calling “trigger” at every mention of something unpleasant makes the word meaningless and makes women seem pathetic, which is what I suspect you think we are.

  • bloomingdedalus

    For normal, intelligent people, these kinds of contradictions would be a GIANT RED FLAG – unless you are disingenuously affiliated with feminist thought…

    http://imageshack.com/a/img203/3682/9nib.png

    http://imageshack.com/a/img513/2751/o3sf.png

    http://imageshack.com/a/img802/361/jpvw.png

  • Faran Moradipour

    Those are some pretty ridiculous generalisations. And I might add that this person tries to justify their position by declaring themselves a “liberal daughter”. That means nothing. First of all, their political allegiance has NO bearing on their concept of justice. (I’m restraining myself from turning this into a rant on partisan politics and the BS political “spectrum”). Furthermore, them being a woman does not make them a spokesperson for the revelation of “the plight of feminism”.

    To every one of those points you can see, there is some truth but it’s skewed to an illogical point. The author is attempting to validate an already established hypothesis by using “generalisations” as evidence to support the thesis.

    To the first point, biologically speaking, men tend to be stronger than women, physically and that’s because of hormones. The fact that women are more likely to be sexually assaulted than men is as a result of an exploitation of that biological difference in genders. That’s a problem.

    Affirmative action is meant to help break social barriers, not “make people smart”. There’s a difference between intelligence, awareness and action.

    To the third point, it’s a dual struggle. Men hold the power in society, so men have a responsibility to help make a difference. Our society is made up of two genders, so it’s up to both parties to make a difference. For the most part, those who hold the power in society are MEN and such, another problem in our society. Think of the abolition of slavery – mainly led by white guys, but it took hundreds and thousands of blacks to push the change. Even then, it still took masses of black Americans to help make changes during the civil rights movement, and eventually figures like Malcolm X, Martin Luthor King Jr, and even more radically, the Black Panthers – ultimately, it was white people that helped implement the changes, after black voices rose up – and still TODAY we have inequality of races in the United States, and the second a person of colour draws attention to it, they’re being uppity and ungrateful. Eff that. When women voice up their concerns they’re a called a “feminist” in a way that the person calling them that is applying a negative implication to the word. The fact that that word has a negative connotation attached to it is indicative of how flawed our society is – like “racial sympathisers”.

    You can’t generalise a group of people who use an ideal as a means to spread chaos. Should we start comparing all Christians to the murderous, savage Crusaders that flooded the streets of Jerusalem with the blood of Israelites and Philistines? I mean, we already do that with the Muslims and Al Qaeda, #amirite?

    As per number 5, what the hell does this even mean? This is sort of like #4 but this one isn’t even a common stereotype.

    Sixth point is a combination of 1 and 4. See above.

    This is an oxymoron. If someone supports feminism, they do not absolutely support paternalism. What is this argument even based off of? This is pretty much ad hominem against all feminists mixed with hasty generalization.

    As per the 8th point, no that’s not at all true. Feminism is about equality, not superiority. It’s in the definition of the word.

    Again, number 9 is seemingly a “point” pulled out of thin air. A true feminist is in support of equality of men and women, which means accounting for your actions as equally as a man – and most moral persons would agree that we should ALL take responsibility of our actions.

    The existence of feminism as a concept and one that is promoted by feminists (obviously) is evidence that the last statement is also false.

    The ONLY problem to feminism (in my humble opinion) is the etymology of the word and its root word being “Female” because it leads to a rather regular misinterpretation of the concept as being “female superiority” rather than “equal treatment for women as men”

    Aside from that, problems that may come up are due to human error. I believe equality of men and women is a truth that should be acknowledged and implemented into our societies.

    • bluharmony

      If you’re not familiar with the incidents and material that led up to this post, then you’re not in a position to critique it. Also, the author’s intentions are similarly not within your grasp.

  • Mike Oliveira

    One thing i’d like to add, is that there is such a thing as women rapists, it’s just that i’ve never met a man who was forced into it, he kinda just accepted it :P

  • kurt bermuda

    Who’s the biggest misogynist? The other woman.

    • bluharmony

      Sadly, there’s a lot of truth to that.

  • Anti-BS

    Was such a great read! I read almost all the comments and have been enlightened toward these aspects of feminism. To which in my honest opinion, its current intoxicated motives stand alone as a contradiction to equality in almost every aspect.

    To those wayward feminists, good luck finding a gentleman to open your door for you, cause now i want you to open the door for me too! At least 50% of the time! -Oh such a biasness to gender culture, when everyone knows men and women are different… Ive not complained much when i served in the army for 2 years as a mandatory run, to which all women in my country are not required to. YET…. I’ve heard such women complain of lesser wages as compared to men etc… When there’s a problem, self-reflect before externalising it pls.. come on.. Its obviously your incapacity, and this is not targeted at women as a gender, its the individuals that use this opportunity to demean the hard working ladies, who have made it on their own. I fully respect womens’ rights and the advocation of freedom to choose your life paths. But not priorities, leeways or mandates to suffice for equality in the name of feminism. And i thank the lot here, for exemplifying this, using rationality over bias to one or the other gender.

  • Bthny Iero

    This really grinds mu gears.
    idk heres MY take on things:
    I confieded in a teacher about my assult… they blamed me because I knew I was going somewhere with an older man and I didnt bring a weapon. (i was 11, going to a sleep over) I was appaulled rhat number one women be taught that they have to be suspicoius of all men. Not all men are monsters or rapists. I was also upset that it was MY fault for the actions of a highly concious functioning man to over power a little girl. ?????
    I dont see how feminism Iaabad thing. Some people that maybe sa “a real women doesnt bake” isnt a feminist.
    sexism is saying “real men like meat on their women” “real men dont watch HBO” “real women dont wear make up”

    feminism is saying ok no screw thatreal men are anyone that states they are males. real women are women who say they are female.
    feminism IS ABOUT EQUALITY AND DEGENERALIZING GENDERS.

    • Bthny Iero

      My appologies on the many spelling error, my phone is being a jerk.

  • Edith Wherton

    13 we are more than our sexual parts. men have to stop thinking of us as sex objects and using derogatory terms which is why we use the word slut shaming , thunder c**t and the vagina monologues because its all about our body parts

  • Jimmy Steele

    is there one of these about liberals?

  • Talah

    Literally all of this is total bullshit. If you understood the nature of a true feminist, not the bullshit “man hating” version, you would understand that feminists are for equality. That is it. Equal treatment. No more, no less. I do not constantly fear rape, but in this day and age it is a possibility. I don’t hate every man, or run at the sight of one late at night but self preservation is very different to feminism. Honestly, how about everyone just chills the fuck out, and actually does some research before you start making assumptions.

    • bluharmony

      May I politely suggest that you follow your own advice? Thanks.

  • http://www.biggerfatterpolitics.blogspot.com BiggerFatterPolitics

    Thin Shaming vs Fat Shaming And the Fat Feminist Agenda of Hate Click Here to see what is worse

    Fat Feminists cry foul when people point out the truth of obesity. Fatties call it fat shaming. Feminists are basically jealous fat girls.

    God created lesbians to stop feminists from breeding!

    The other word for feminist is: Misandrist…

    • cindy

      Well at least you’re not self-serving. Who would think a fat head would be pro-fat-shaming. Good for you!

      • http://www.biggerfatterpolitics.blogspot.com BiggerFatterPolitics

        I prefer meat face.

        As the de facto leader of the New Fat Acceptance Movement, I Fat Bastard, freely admit that fat people are gluttons. The fat feminists on the other hand lie about the reason they are fat. They are angry fat girls who hate men especially fat men and they deny reality.

        Click this link to read about true fat acceptance and the plight that angry fat girls face. http://biggerfatterblog.blogspot.com/2014/05/fat-girls-with-smelly-crotches-ask-fat.html

      • bluharmony

        I’m fat, so? Only problem with being fat, though, is that it causes high blood pressure, diabetes, and heart disease. While there’s no shame in being sick, there’s no shame in trying to make yourself better, either.

        • cindy

          I think you are confused about my post. I am against shaming fat people. That is what I am suggesting fat-head was doing.

  • Kate McCaffrey

    I know this post is older but I just found this and I have to say thank you! I was feeling saddened and alone after being attacked and unfriended for expressing view points similar to you and many commenters. I was called disgusting and apparently I’m a traitor to women everywhere simply because I suggested less telling men to shut up and more trying to positively influence change. You see I’m a traitor, because even though men don’t have the right to tell women what to do, women have the right to make other women feel like crap simply for not feeling and thinking the same. That’s fascism. Not equality. I have the right to focus on what I view as positive human characteristics, compassion, sincerity, and vulnerability.

    • bluharmony

      I’ve been heartened to find that many (most) women feel this way. Don’t let the dogmatists get you down. You think for yourself and stand up for yourself; that’s something to be proud of.

  • Serocco

    These feminists are not true feminists.

    They aren’t even female supremacists, either. They practice in identity politics – meaning, they incite anger so they can personally benefit from it, and they never actually do any work towards gender equality.

  • cindy

    It seems the author doesn’t understand any of the feminisms and therefore has chosen to perpetuate some reactionary, stereotypical presumptions.

    • bluharmony

      Insults always work better than arguments. Your knowledge of modern feminism is so impressive that I’m literally floored.

      Might I suggest getting an education? It might help you out a bit, and might make you pause before making ignorant comments. OTH, some people enjoy being ignorant, and if that describes you, then have at it.

      • cindy

        You’re floored are you? Why? My comment says nothing unusual. In fact it’s ordinary. It’s my argument that your thinking is reactionary and biased. It’s not an insult, it’s a critique.You know what’s funny; it’s almost uncanny that the people who give out advice are almost always those who are in desperate need of the very advice they are giving.

        • bluharmony

          Yeah, that’s why I used an isolating descriptor in the title, and phrased the whole post as a question. Also, I’m tired of the no true Scotsman fallacy being used to defend ridiculous utterances, bullying, and abuse lobbed at others under the broad banner of feminism. Bullies are bullies, no matter what they choose to call themselves. And if you choose to call yourself a name generally adopted by bullies (such as “radical feminist”) then that’s exactly what you are.

        • Giorgio

          excuse my cindy, but the point is not if we understand feminism or not, the point is this is the kind of feminism we are exposed to everyday. So if you really desire to instruct someone on feminism I suggest you do it to the authors of this kind of embarrassing feminism who seems to be in fashion today.

  • Kirsten Perridge

    I found this after a particularly nasty encounter with some really hateful radical feminists online. I responded to an article posted on their Facebook page by saying that I thought the author had gone too far and made unfair generalities about men. I was personally attacked. They made fun of my name, called me a traitor to women, insulted my intelligence, and then eventually told me I needed to go away because I was a fool. I was very careful throughout the exchange to never get personal with them. The whole thing made me really sad, and angry too. How has feminism come to this, that women bully other women who disagree? I’m not part of their little club unless I prove I hate men enough to pass initiation? I have unfollowed all feminist pages and want a new movement. I still think there are genuine issues women need to address. As a mother childcare is an impossible issue for me and has really held me back. But feminism does not seem to be the place for me to work for positive change. Hell, I think those girls really started to hate me the minute they heard I was married. I guess if loving my husband makes me a traitor I’m just going to have to own being a traitor.

    • Astrokid

      Note the date on the cartoon.. 2004
      Its nothing new. Check out Donna LaFramboise from 1996.
      http://www.freezepage.com/1399064185JDOLBIPZOL

      Chapter 4 deals with the issue of political correctness. According to Laframboise, many radical feminists are intolerant of those who disagree with them, and women who diverge from the “party line” are dismissed as not being true feminists. This aspect of intolerance of dissenting opinions concerns Laframboise the most. Using several examples, she illustrates how women who have tried to express any views that are not considered acceptable to radical feminists have been viciously attacked on a personal level and treated with contempt as the enemy. The author is especially upset with professors who engage in “indoctrination” as opposed to scholarly inquiry.

      In Chapter 6 she discusses the men’s movement and its implications for feminism. Here Laframboise discusses the problems men have to face because of how men’s roles are stereotyped, and she encourages feminists to be more understanding of the problems dealt men.

      In Chapter 7 she states that feminists have used biased statistics in their analyses of male power. She asserts that, in reality, many men who are in low paying jobs, for example, lack the power attributed to all men by feminists. In fact, a relatively small group of men hold economic power over most men as well as most women. Men who are at the low end of the economic scale are also disadvantaged because many women consider them to be less desirable as potential partners. Furthermore, Laframboise argues that compared with men, many women have sexual power that can be used to their advantage and that male sexuality is devalued in comparison with female sexuality.

      • Kirsten Perridge

        Thanks! I’m not surprised that this has been discussed before, even this post is old. But it’s new to me and I’m excited to read this book. Perhaps my group of moderate women who advocate for women’s rights but also work for larger human rights issues already exists. I really have come away from this experience with a concern for how spiteful feminism may actually work against our best interests. I appreciate your feedback.

        • bluharmony

          I appreciate your feedback. Please stick around and comment, as you please.

    • John Dutchie

      I am so sorry on what has happen to you….Kudos to you on comment of loving your husband…He is a very lucky man….All the best ….

  • AH

    Er… No. As a feminist none of that is what I’m saying and judging all feminists based on the bigoted, misandrist viewpoints of radicals is as ignorant and simple minded as judging all Muslims by the viewpoints of fundamentalists or all right wing individuals by the viewpoints of fascists. So I will address all of your points as well as I am able;
    1) no one I have ever come across has said that women and men are equally strong. Of course not, statistically speaking (although obviously there are exceptions), men have a greater muscle to fat ratio than women and as a woman I am more likely to be overpowered physically and subsequently subject to abuse than a man. However I will never deny that sexual/emotional/domestic abuses can also happen to men because they can. No feminist I have ever come across has ever said that all men are rapists, but all women are a

    • AH

      Aware* that as a lone woman they run the risk of being attacked and overpowered by men. That is all there is to it.
      2) I’m not sure I really understand your point here, affirmative action programs are for the purpose of providing opportunity to those who are less likely to access it based on their belonging to a specific group that is sometimes discriminated against. And in some industries women are discriminated against. But I will add that we should not just hire people because they are women so that we have an even balance hiring should be based on capability

      • AH

        3) it’s not a matter of ‘needing’ feminist men to speak for us, it’s a matter of individuals, regardless of gender, recognising certain inherent prejudices and discriminations and the only reason feminists want men as well to speak with (not for) them is because it exemplifies their belief that men and women are equal and can represent feminism equally.
        4) this point is just inherently short sighted in my opinion, yes some radical and wrong ‘feminists’ will conduct themselves in such a way but I would never and neither do many that I know. Applying this to all of them again is like saying that all Christians should be blamed for the bible bashing attacks on non Christians

        • AH

          5) this point I’m not really sure how to respond to because I can barely understand it? I don’t know anyone who holds that kind of belief, the point about feminism (for me at least anyway) is to say that no hobby/pass-time/role or anything should be exclusive for one gender and that women and men should be able to enjoy things that are typically attributed to the other gender without being alienated. That is not to say that they shouldn’t enjoy pass-times generally attributed to their own gender either, it’s important to note that while men and women should be considered equal only a fool doesn’t recognise that physically, biologically etc they are not identical

          • AH

            6) raising awareness of the abuses that happen to women on the basis of their being women does not mean making oneself a victim. Trying to emphasise that very many women suffer from certain prejudices and stereotypes as well as risks (I.e. From sexual abuse – again not an abyss exclusively experienced by women) does not mean saying we are perpetual victims but rather that yes there are certain discriminatory actions that are prevalent and we should be encouraged to open up about them. Again saying that all feminists believe their viewpoint is the only viewpoint and everyone else is wrong and bigoted is a massive generalisation that only comes from not actually listening to what many people have to say.

          • Bruce Wayne

            7) I really need some help here, I’m sure that it is just me not being knowledgeable but I don’t understand why you think that feminists support paternalism any more than anyone else. Please help?

          • Bruce Wayne

            8) neither I nor many feminists say that our cause should be given precedence over others because other discrimination is ‘less important’. It is all important and being a feminist and supporting movements that oppose racism for example are not mutually exclusive. It is important to remember that women make up more than half of the world’s population and yet still today around the world people are discriminated against for the very reason that they belong to that more than half, so that’s really the only reason people rail about feminism’s importance. Any evidence of feminists actively trying to convince people that women’s rights are more important than any other form ofns

          • Bruce Wayne

            Of* social justice should be taken as a ridiculous, arrogant and intolerant viewpoint singular to that individual/ those individuals in the same way that the racist views of a right wing individual should be seen as their own not belonging to all members of the right wing (again just another example to highlight the excessive generalisation here)

          • Bruce Wayne

            9) Again here I’m almost dumbfounded, and don’t know how to address this point really because I can’t understand how anyone can have made that assumption that that is what feminists believe? Any feminist who believes that is an imbecile in my opinions and I certainly hold myself and anyone else responsible for their actions regardless of beliefs.

          • Bruce Wayne

            10) clearly not all feminists find disagreement too ‘triggering’ as many provide thoughtful and calm responses to adversity and do so in a way that is simply meant to highlight a personal belief and not attack.
            Ultimately, for me at least, feminism is simply about affording women the same opportunities, rights and (very importantly) respect as men, something which is still lacking in many countries. It’s very simple really and although yes there are radical, really quite ridiculous individuals who would have these kinds of views to apply them to all feminists is really just incorrect in many cases. To title this ‘so this is what you’re saying?’ And then to go so far as to put words in the mouths of all feminists based on the again ridiculous viewpoints of some seems to me to be a very simplistic approach. I will always identify as a feminist while there exist so many inequalities around the world and while countries still exist in which women cannot drive or cross borders without male consent, but I will never vilify women for being stay at home mothers or adopting roles typically associated with ‘femininity’, as the world is a spectrum of human characteristics and variety is what makes it so great. All it is really about is equality, which we have made great steps toward in so many areas but which is still lacking in so many others.

          • bluharmony

            Yes, the above applies to some feminists (and even then, there’s a bit of hyperbole involved), but certainly not all. I agree with the rest of your views.

          • Bruce Wayne

            Basically I think we can all agree we abhor people who in the name of feminism hold the beliefs above but the article is, I feel, a prime example of the straw man fallacy; misrepresenting/exaggerating your opponents argument to make it easier to attack

          • bluharmony

            Yes, we can agree on that, but (some) feminists are easier to attack than you think. Just look at the ridiculous #banbossy campaign. While I agree that my piece is both hyperbolic and somewhat tongue-in-cheek, all of the views above have been expressed by modern feminists (though not necessarily the same ones). I’m all for women’s rights, but I don’t want women’s main contribution to the arts & sciences to be a total absence of logic and a shoddy understanding of biology/evolutionary psychology. Women are more than that, better than that.

          • Bruce Wayne

            Out of interest, not from a argumentative point of view but because I’d genuinely like to know your opinion, what specifically about the ban bossy campaign do you think is so bad? Do you just think it’s excessive and opens feminism to ridicule? Or something worse?

          • bluharmony

            I grew up in communist Russia where certain kinds of speech were forbidden or strongly discouraged. As a child, I was taught what I could and could not say outside the home. I was also often ridiculed for being of Jewish descent. If living in America is oppressive, then it’s oppressive to the lower classes, not to women per se.

            There are many legitimate issues facing women today, even in the West. Threats to abortion and healthcare rights, for one. Attempts to to gut the VAWA. Street rape, date rape, and domestic violence. Further, little has changed in terms of women as primary care givers to their children, yet they’re supposed to have careers comparable to men’s, as well. Recent studies show that women are unhappier than ever (or at least since the last set of similar studies has been done), while men’s level of happiness has remained the same.

            Many men are still disrespectful to women and treat them as sex objects. While there are times when this is appropriate, there are times when it’s not, and many men don’t know the difference.

            As for the Middle East and Third World Countries, women really are second class citizens, if citizens at all. In sum, there is so much important work to be done in terms of women’s rights around the world.

            Instead, we have internet campaigns like #banbossy, where it’s suggested that every girl who’s called bossy should be told she has leadership potential, without even ascertaining whether she’s been bossy or not. Leadership skills and bossy behavior are two completely different things. Both men and women are called bossy when they’re authoritative, obnoxious, and demanding. And both sexes can be called bossy unfairly, although I’m willing to speculate that it happens more to women than to men. But so what? Any woman with true leadership potential won’t be stopped by a benign word like bossy (or worse).

            Most of the limitations women face have roots in our biology — pregnancy, lactation, hormonal changes menstruation. These limitations are not the fault of men; however, to have women fully participate in the workforce, allowances for these differences must be made.

            So you have to pick one, either we’re the same or we’re different, and guess what? We’re a sexually dimorphic species, so we’re different. Therefore,different (positive) treatment for women is, at least at times, appropriate.

            Moreover, I’m disgusted with feminist attempts to do away with science and empiricism as a male-only thing. No, it’s not. Science is the most reliable way we’ve found to evaluate the world around us to date and women need to enter that field by making valid contributions rather than constantly accusing it of bias.

            This does not mean that men, women, intersex people, or anyone else is less worthy or important as a human being. But it does mean that we must be looking for real solutions to real problems, and not wasting time on the internet spewing hate at any one who rejects the term “feminism.”

            I value free speech, and that means I’m going to hear things I’m offended by. But it is my hope and belief that in the marketplace of ideas, the best ones will win out.

          • bluharmony

            I just wrote a lengthy response, but it accidentally got erased. There’s a big discussion of this on my Facebook page. If you send me a friend request, I’ll accept and point you to it. You can find me by my real name, handle, or both.

          • Bruce Wayne

            I managed to read it in an email notification (where it was displayed) so no worries, but thanks! I am interested in that so I may do so. I appreciate your insight it has given me much to consider, so thank you!

          • bluharmony

            I was trying to fix some grammar and typos, and managed to delete the whole comment instead. Hate that. There is no hatred of women (and very little dislike of feminism, at least as a monolithic entity) on my FB page. If anything, it’s a matter of priorities and representing the interests of women with diverse opinions, rather than just a few very vocal ones.

            I guess the main problem with feminism is that the beliefs of the people who adopt that name are so different as to make the label virtually meaningless. If there was ever a point to this piece, I think that was it.

          • Bruce Wayne

            Then I suppose largely I agree with you, it’s been nice to hear more of your p.o.v, I probably took such issue because I am (perhaps too stubbornly) hanging onto the name of feminism simply because I am so disturbed by the global conditions for many women and I suppose I feel that the name feminism has more impact and focus. But then the mindsets illustrated above I suppose have the capacity to negate that impact in the eyes of many, which is frustrating.

          • bluharmony

            Yes, that’s my main point. Women are suffering all over the world, including the West, yet the word “bossy” is somehow a giant concern? To make a difference, one needs more than a keyboard, a catchy slogan, and a cutesy hashtag. And the problem of gender relations is a difficult one because women are born with burdens that men will never face. Thus, at least in the West, society attempts to equalize the situation by imposing certain burdens on men. Some people feel this is unfair, while others feel it doesn’t go far enough. I actually fall into the latter camp. But I’ve been bullied and harassed by feminists online (many of them male) for my views and told I’m not a feminist; and that’s fine by me — I don’t want to be. It won’t change my views on women’s rights, and it won’t stop me from donating to the causes I care about. But I’ll never claim to speak for all women, because just like men, we’re individuals with the right to choose our own paths in life, to the extent that’s possible, anyway.

          • bluharmony

            And I do feel like making a big deal out of non-issues such as the world “bossy” diminishes the real suffering experienced by women all over the world.

    • bluharmony

      I’ve addressed some of your arguments in the comments and provided relevant links. But more generally speaking: hyperbole. Look it up.

  • Richard Pierick Smith

    A wise woman once said, “The greatest enemy of progress is not stagnation, but false-progress…”. This is the epitome of that quote. I see infant and toddler boys being born into a world, innocent of gender bias and sexism. They grow up in a society which overuses pop-phrases like “you go girl” or “girl power”. What do we say for boys? “Atta boy”? Usually boys get that when they do something servile or within the lines of expectation. Girls on the other hand get “you go girl” for the most banal tasks, but mostly for “bucking” the system, i.e buying that dress even though she doesn’t have the money (probably a mans fault). You do the math here. We’re going to have a culture of emasculated men in 20 years. And then this will start all over, but you’ll hear about something called ‘Masculinism’ WHICH will be equally ridiculous to what we now call “feminism”.

  • Educate Yourself

    lol pathetic

  • Educate Yourself

    Alright, this is so ludicrous that I’m just gonna have to go down the list.
    1. You forget men can and should be feminists too. All men are potential rapists? When you look at it that way, all people are potential murderers and it’s too dangerous to interact with anyone ever.
    2. No they don’t?
    3. I’m a feminist guy, but I’m sure feminism wouldn’t cease to exist without us.
    4. If someone does this, then they are just a bad person.
    6. Very similar to number 1
    7. All sexism is bad, but paternalism is a vague term.
    8. People who believe this are not feminists. I think you’re confused about what feminism is.
    9-10. These qualities don’t have anything to do with feminism, they are found in certain misled people.

    • MDBrook

      ^Beta Male lol

  • http://youtube.com/imagocanis Drawing Butts

    @bluharmony:disqus now i’m wondering what your opinions are on patriarchy and rape culture

    • bluharmony

      Summarily, I think that the remnants of a patriarchy still exist in the West, but that we don’t presently live in one. I don’t “blame” the patriarchy for anything. To the extent women are “oppressed,” it’s by biology and not by men. But to fail to acknowledge our physical (and therefore, possibly cognitive) differences/functions is folly and can only lead to unhappiness for all.

      Rape culture is nonsense. We live in a culture where rape is viewed as an awful crime. But with feminists working night and day to expand the definition of rape to include normal sexual intercourse, anything is possible, and not in a good way.

      • http://youtube.com/imagocanis Drawing Butts

        you don’t expect me to hate my rapey penis? you’re a horrible vagina traitor/glimmer of hope in the sinking ship of the dialogue on gender issues.

  • nemesis_1

    Here’s the thing: this isn’t a problem with ‘feminism'; it’s a problem with LEFTISM. Most of the tenets of contemporary (meaning 2nd and 3rd wave) feminism are drawn from Marxist critical theory, which pervades the entirety of leftist thought. Nearly ALL feminist academics and bigwigs are, to a certain extent, children of Marxist critical theory, and have been since the late 60’s.

    Here’s a test: apply items 1 – 10 to black people. You’ll see this is EXACTLY how the ideological and cultural left treats RACE. The language is IDENTICAL. Leftist thought requires that there ALWAYS be a ‘permanent victim’ and a ‘permanent perpetrator.’ Without these two static and unchanging items, Marxist critical theory cannot exist.

    That’s why feministas need to keep women on the VICTIMS list. If they start to question their own paradigm, the whole mechanism falls apart. And they WILL NOT LET THAT HAPPEN. They need to protect their cozy little sinecures at universities, publications, think tanks, etc. That’s why they’re so vicious. They have an INDUSTRY TO PROTECT.

    Grievance is their bread and butter.

    This isn’t a theory. If you read up on the intellectual history of the United States, you’ll see it’s true. Most of the 2nd wave feminists that came out of the late 60’s, early 70’s were avowed Marxists. Look them up.

    PREDICTION: as you delve into the REAL aspects of contemporary feminism and find out what a hodge-podge of leftist nonsense it really is, you’ll find yourself disagreeing more and more with the foundations of liberal thought AS A WHOLE. And at some point . . . you will no longer be a liberal.

    • bluharmony

      Your prediction is wrong. My interest is in a welfare state, not critical theory. I see critical theory as an intellectual failure and have no interest in it.

      I believe in remedying inequality where it’s presently most egregious and in strong regulation of corporate interests.

      Will this lead to a utopia? Of course not. But it might lead to a kinder, gentler capitalism, with greater tolerance and opportunity for all.

      • nemesis_1

        And my interest is in preventing the endless welfare state you want to enact.

        “I believe in remedying inequality where it’s presently most egregious.”

        REALLY . . . and what sacred committee gets to formulate such remedies? Will it be the same committee that authored Sarbanes Oxley, which put small community banks out of business with endless, meaningless regulations and made the big banks EVEN BIGGER because big banks have legions of lawyers? Or will it be the same philosopher-geniuses who wrote the Fair Housing Act, which inadvertently caused a massive, UNREGULATED mortgage-backed OTC market that nearly bankrupted the country? Or how about the original supporters of Affirmative Action, which has done absolutely NOTHING to help the black community as a whole?

        A kinder, gentler capitalism? You mean the kind where someone holds a gun to my head and FORCES me to hire someone? The kind where my employer taxes go to around 15% so that EVERYONE in my company has less money? I get really, really scared when hardcore libs and lefties start talking about making the world a ‘nicer’ place. Usually, ‘nicer’ means some group of jackboots looting the place.

        Scratch a hardcore feminist, and you will find a LEFTIST. Contemporary feminism and contemporary leftist thought come from the SAME PLACE. The same faculty lounges where tenured elitists formulate ways to make the world a more ‘equal’ place.

        By some scented candles, go to your ‘nice’ place, and let the big kids run things. It’s a brutal world out there. Always has been; always will be.

        • bluharmony

          No sacred committee is required to determine who is working (or is unable to work) forty hours a week, yet still can’t afford basic necessities such as food, shelter, medical care, and education. No one dreams of being a homeless drug addict when they grow up.

          The U.S. tax code should be reformed and loopholes for the wealthy (including corporations) need to be closed. Corporations and businesses need more regulation, not less — especially once they’ve become so large and powerful as to actually *be* the government, and that is where we are today.

          Especially in the West, life is better for more people today than it’s ever been. This is due to human potential for change and innovation. And there’s no reason we can’t try to make it better still. Yes, the world is a brutal place, but that doesn’t mean we have to be.

          • billjenkins

            Where are these large evil companies “being” government?

            You have utopian views. I wonder what salon products you buy daily that are products of price controls enacted by supplier/seller contracts. That isn’t very capitalistic, don’t you think? Perhaps the government should step in there as well?

          • bluharmony

            Campaign financing and lobbying, for starters.

      • billjenkins

        “But it might lead to a kinder, gentler capitalism, with greater tolerance and opportunity for all.” But the things you believe in does the exact opposite.

        By getting the government involved, you will almost certainly stifle capitalism, promote TOTALITARIANISM, and opportunities for “all” will be replaced with opportunities for “some”.

        The perfect quote that comes to mind is Orwell’s “All animals are equals but some animals are more equal than others.” Your trust in government and the political baggage that goes with the people you support makes you an enemy of the very institutions the US was founded on.

        Monopolies and other anti-free-market tactics of large corporations should certainly be regulated, but if you do your research you’ll find the heavy hand of government regulation has almost always crushed innovation and the little guy. Those regulations are often supported by the largest companies because they know it will crush their competition.

        • bluharmony

          I don’t trust the government or free markets. I think there need to be adequate checks and balances for both. Moreover, I would prefer to see a democracy with educated and informed voters.

  • nemesis_1

    Contemporary ‘feminism’ is NOT about freedom of thought; it’s about strict adherence to an ideological philosophy. And that ideological philosophy is LEFTIST. Read Herbert Marcuse. He said, quite plainly, that ideas and speech which are harmful to the ‘revolution’ should be SUPPRESSED. He called it ‘tolerant intolerance.’

    Marcuse was a big grandaddy of contemporary Marxist thought, for those of you who don’t know. He’s still treated with biblical importance in academia.

    I will say it again; for hardcore, ideological feminists – the professional types such as college profs, editors, authors, think-tankers – it is extremely important to continue the notion of women as ‘oppressed.’ Leftist thought REQUIRES that there be a static, unchanging group of ‘oppressed’ people on one side, and a group of ‘oppressors’ on the other. Without that clear, precise dichotomy, Marxist/leftist critical theory COLLAPSES. Contemporary feminist theory is a child of Marxist critical theory. As goes the child, so goes the parent.

    Picture it like this: a hardcore feminist ‘Women’s Studies’ professor walks into a classroom one day and says, ‘You know, looking at the state of America today, I don’t think women are as oppressed as many of my colleagues think they are.’ How long do you think that woman would would keep her job? Maybe a week? Maybe two weeks?

    And where do you think the hardcore, unyielding feministas of today get their ideas? From the back of a cereal box? Nope. They get it from the fem-leftist intelligentsia.

    This is why I KNOW that when I’m talking to a hardcore feminist, I KNOW that, in addition to the Marxist gender-tripe she spews, she will also be in favor of forced economic redistributionism, more regulation on business (no mater how useless or damaging), etc, etc. It all comes from the SAME PLACE. And the really INSANE fem-lefties will support groups like Hamas, which treat women like cattle.

    Moonbats; all of them.

  • Guest

    Modern western feminism is completely bizarre. Women are getting raped and killed in undeveloped countries, and in western societies we have these utterly stupid people saying things like “I don’t want to be looked at sexually.” as if men aren’t looked at sexually, “Why can’t women walk around topless.” as if this has anything to do with male oppression. “Men are not letting women run tech companies”, ignoring that men outnumber women 20:1 in computer science at university.

    It appears to be an ingrained culture of victimism that is hard to shake.

  • billjenkins

    Sadly “what feminism should be” and “what feminism really is” varies greatly. To me, it is just another victim mentality that self-serving people and groups feed off of to line their pockets and increase their power.

    The sad part is they take personal responsibility and flush it down the toilet in their quest to turn reality into the fictional utopia of liberal thought…

  • Mckela Kanu

    I decided I was a feminist when I was in seventh grade. For me, feminism is about equal rights for EVERYBODY. And yes, feminism is typically associated with women because that’s how it started out. If you look back at the 20th century things were not looking good for women. But it got better with women like Alice Paul and Margaret Sangers. And feminism became more complex as the century went on. If you were a stay-at-home mom/dad you could call yourself a feminist Because that was your choice. If you wanted to be a doctor you could call yourself a feminist because that was your choice. Feminism is about being able to make choices. At least that’s how I interpret it as. I don’t think you can be a true feminist if you say you want women to be equal and in the same breath say you want someone to treat you like a lady. That’s not feminism. That never was feminism.

    • MDBrook

      Oh cry me a river. The battle is over. There is no more fight left. The only thing not equal for women is the 30 cents on the dollar. But that will soon be fixed WITHOUT your help lol. Yes, you decided to be a feminist when you knew nothing about this world….but that doesn’t mean much. How about you focus on real issues like RACISM!

  • Pingback: Whereas Traditional Feminism teaches that men and women are equal, Modern Feminism teaches that men and women are the same. Read more at http://www.pondrin.com/Blog.php?user_id=281&title=TraditionalFeminismv.ModernFeminism#SJCjZFOKovjS8ZfK.99Whereas T

  • Pingback: In My Own Words

  • rexxthunder .

    You’re not the only woman that is questioning this stuff.

    https://www.youtube.com/user/girlwriteswhat

  • Peter

    Feminists do what they preach to others not to do. They shame woman, they silence women, they insult women, they judge women for their choices and they even wish that some women would get raped. Question any single aspect of feminist doctrine and the feminist ayatollahs will pronounce a fatwa against such a woman.

    • bluharmony

      Yes, having been on the receiving end of that, I’m still reeling. I’m not even important enough to attack. What’s the point?

  • yawn

    the real issue with feminism, or any similar equality movement, is that it is eventually co-opted by the loudest and angriest, the extremists, so the middle of the road feminists who are sane get drown out by a sea of hyperbole and hypocrisy.

    Which is a shame because those loud angry extremists seem completely unaware that that what they say and do is counter productive to the goal (I assume) they are trying to achieve. Then again, maybe the goal is just to punish all men for the real or perceived wrongs that they have done to these loud and angry people. Whenever I see someone like this I just think “whatever someone did to this person to make them so hateful has to be pretty fucking awful” so I try to keep it in mind, I don’t respond and just move on.

    But I’m glad to see there are people out there who are willing to weed through the ridiculousness to cut at the heart of the issues and expose some of these people for what they are; Hateful bigots. .

    • bluharmony

      It’s not always easy. They’re a an angry, vengeful lot.

  • AMRA

    Love this post.

  • http://j.nelsonleith.com/ John Leith

    “Modern”?

    “We are, as a sex, infinitely superior to men…” – Elizabeth Cady Stanton (1815-1902)

  • Mark Wright

    I like how I see a bunch of people on here start their comments with “As a feminist” like that gives you superior moral and ethic standards. Let me say this once it doesn’t. It’s just like saying “As a Christian”.

  • Jay-jay

    You meet these people throughout your life, out of nowhere, that—a sense of interconnectivity between all things. Let them know you recognize their loved in some way – but I am very different all the good we each do each day.

    Wouldn’t it be cool to be the life of them all? To run this story through kind of a standard of arts. They might not be revivable. It’s very simple.”You and the world you live in are but a grain of sand.” Whether it be their government, types of awareness in any particular subject, begging of these gentlemen for once
    in their life to be serious.

    Every person is allowed to live their life as they want to. And
    in spite of its magnificence, I wouldn’t stop there. We might state the argument by which they support their view. After all, this is someone who helped define life. I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke. Systems talk to each other and take care of all kinds of logistics;I do think that for the world.

    We do know our children will grow up to live in a world with all the grand challenges that chiefwork is written in cool and scientific
    terms, now where I failed and if by some miracle God ever
    granted me. “We can’t all go around doing 113.” That kind of thing has been said a lot about Saunders since then. It was a very close culture and people cared about each other in so many ways. “Continuing their psudo-intellectual blogs way after all creativity dried
    up”? But really, are those the kind of people you want to associate
    with? I know the climate deniers make their own graphs–it’s a good example.

    On the contrary, at this point some of you may be thinking, “That’s all very fine and good, live in a first world country and trust me we
    procrastinate here too. I [should have] said, earnestly. “When I went to do law, I kind of drifted through that and thought I can pass these exams. It was good and fun, and now I’m here, so that’s the story. Why should I care praying for some kind of cure? Some society or group or person’s idea of ‘beauty and here’s what should be done.

    These stories or, perhaps I met my demise in some other way; I see the light, I look o’er a world of beautiful things; you turn the handle
    and sing “all around the mulberry bush” “bitches made me do it” defense? Whole called “spirit world,” walk and each of us must
    learn to turn on his or her own light. “What a person truly believes
    isn’t what they think or say, it’s what they do. And most
    importantly, keep smiling, because life’s a beautiful
    thing and there are so all things we enjoy in life.

    Oh, they might know can make some strong guesses as to what he has in mind. “Can you honestly say that can get as good a life can be very, very real? To the doctor, it’s all just too hard, and they don’t deserve to be well. During these times, someone must actually, in an entirely literal sense, I was once Christian and I have some wonderful friends which to this day we all know it’s “you”, but to spell it that way imitates the way we say it.

    “These guys had discovered it all way before me,” a cause into your story, must discover them anew if a teenager who has had all the lessons is able to see. “Objects,” he says, “especially works of art have their way of filling.That these Holy Spirit will teach you ALL
    things (John 16:13; John 14:26) books from libraries than ever before – books of all kinds. I am guilty of a lot of these things you should not do.

    The question isn’t who is going to let me; it’s who is going to stop me. According to Gandhi,“if your wishes are chaste, then they become true”. Which means if they say they don’t want you around, common sense tells us there must be different as beautiful which really anything like unconditional love isn’t at all. to do with the way
    people think and live “God conceals from men the happiness that they may endure life”.

    It’s easy. The thing is, all I see before me in my life is work. Don’t listen to those who say, “It’s not done that way. His explanation makes
    it easy to see and understand how a person could be think consciousness can be explained in its own terms taught
    a god who I don’t think is truly love, the thought of that someone would take her away from me. Know women love men
    with a sense of humor, like dislike etc.

    It’s unacceptable and you don’t need to keep accepting it; Do you think “Oh no, I hate this, I required to not say or do
    anything“? “Because of his great love for us, God, who is rich
    in mercy, made us alive.” And asked,”You don’t really think God cares! Light of Jesus’ resurrection it is nonetheless a proper way of his/her What do you think this is, the eye of a Lion? “You may say you know not, but I do, sweet Jay-jay” “Well,” I said, “isn’t that interesting!”From the over 16,000 entries, Seigfried believes there to be around 36, 289 are readily available this time of year, I even found them on. Turn the Radio Off.

    My voices don’t care about me. Propaganda machine and the powerful one summed it up you must learn to have no hate, no pride in one self, WOW. I’m so happy!Squeee!!! Many feminists would
    like to see a pro-feminist man discusses men’s issues. Thank God
    someone with Insight. Who believes he is his own God, or if you
    prefer “God.

  • LHathaway

    14. Women rail for ‘equality’ yet never, ever pick a man smaller and weaker than her as a boyfriend. Apparently, challenging gender roles, making efforts to reduce violence against women, and making up for past injustice have limits.

  • Leona james

    Superb information and thanks to post us.Evander

  • Phenix Rising

    … it’s just lazy wanna be real women fighting against REAL WOMEN WHO ARE REAL WOMEN… and that’s all… oh! – and they want everything for free… because they don’t want to work for it = double standard typical hoe crap – IGNORE THEM AND DON’T FEED THEIR APPETITES FOR DESTRUCTION AND LET THEM LEARN THE HARD WAY – BY ACTUALLY THINKING AND WORKING.