A Voice for Me – 11 Signs you are a Feminist


I always thought there was one really clear cut sign that you are a feminist.

Do you think women are equal to men apart from minor biological differencees and that women should be treated the same as men?

If the answer is yes. You are a feminist. You may  fall to your knees and scream “NOOOOOO” to the heavens.

Oooooooooooooooo!

But now there are 11 signs that you may be one. It may be parody, however judging from the way it’s being pushed it seems unlikely that the comment section  (It’s MRA and anti-FTB-tastic. Because why help men when you can bash women?)

So let’s have some fun!

1. You think no woman should be called a slut, but you are all for and even participate in slutwalks

I was supposed to attend the Bangalore Slut Walk, it was cancelled  when the right to assemble for women was revoked because of men. Men and conservatives who threatened women who were marching for the right to walk in India without harassment or risk and to not be shamed because of their clothes. It was cancelled roughly a year before Nirbhaya.

Now no one will stop them.

And that is why the SlutWalk exists. Because a lot of people’s defence against the rape of women is that they were dressed like sluts. They were asking for it. Well that argument was used by people in India who suggested the same thing for Nirbhaya.

For my readers who are American and anyone who is unaware, I am a British guy who works as an expat in India. Nirbhaya was the “name” given to the victim of the Delhi Rape in 2012. Nirbhaya was sodomised with an iron rod resulting in a ruptured colon leading to her death by  peritonitis and septicaemia. She died slowly. And she was blamed for it. She was a slut, so she got raped.

So Indian women braved bullets, batons and beatings to fight for justice. People died, cops were beaten by mobs. Women were beaten and people even were shot. But change began. The dialogue changed from the old idiots (mainly men) who blamed her and started a new dialogue of changing culture.

 The name picked in Canada. The advice given was “Avoid rape by not dressing sluttily”. Let me rephrase that in a way you would find repulsive. She wasn’t wearing a burka so she was raped. Slutty is relative after all. One culture’s slutty is another’s normal.

Forsooth!

The ENTIRE point of a Slut Walk is to point out that not dressing in skimpy outfits would not stop rape and that there are many survivors of rape who walked wearing clothes similar to what they got raped in. And many women walked in outrageously skimpy outfits in order to point out that if you consider women to be sluts then chances are it never mattered what they wore in the first place.

How much leg must you be showing precisely before you are slutty? At what point is a rapist turned off by the amount of cloth in the way? Does the rapist say “A burka! My only weakness! Your shapeless form has turned rape into a case of deal or no deal and I would never live it down if I raped someone uncool!”. That really is what it boils down to. Bad fashion scares away rapists.

A rapist doesn’t really care what you wear. The entire point of a slut walk was to protest against people blaming women for being raped simply because they dressed in a way someone would consider provocative. To point out how moronic this argument and it’s echo chamber is?

Nirbhaya was wearing jeans. She was a slut because you could see the shape of her legs. What this point is complaining about is just a few steps away.

2. You want to ban pornography because it objectifies women but own a copy of 50 shades of grey

My claim to fame is I once had an article retweeted by Nina Hartley when I was working with sex workers.

Porn is changing a lot. Yes there are men who objectify women in porn but porn as a whole is one of the places where women earn more. And where changes are being made with regards to how women are being treated. In fact, from the sound of things… there is more progress within the porn industry with regards to women and their safety and acceptability than among say…

Skeptics and Atheists. We have seen more concerted backlashes against women in our community than within the porn community.

Feminism is not a monolith, there are sex positive feminists. I myself disagree with a “famous feminist” on sex positivity. I am staunchly in favour of protection and rights of sex workers. By contrast, Taslima Nasrin is an old school feminist who thinks that these women are always being abused and that all sex workers are forced into it.

By contrast there are women like Nina Hartley who were active in pornography and who push for women’s rights too. These are not mutually exclusive things.

And just because you own 50 Shades of Grey and enjoy a BDSM doesn’t mean you like being beaten up. So what you have here is two opposing views within feminism. I have no problem with 50 Shades of Grey, it’s a silly book. It is erotica, not a manual on BDSM. It’s porn and women like porn. There is a major market for it..

3. You demand men take ownership of their lives while simultaneously blaming all your problems on the Patriarchy

Except men are more in control of their lives than women are and the fact that the police can stand up and blame women for being raped in Canada. We are still discussing Birth Control access over decisions made by men. We are still discussing Abortion.

And feminists don’t just blame the patriarchy but also other things that cause harm. Many feminists mock “Fashion Magazines” which are primarily run by  women. Many feminists fight for pro-Choice against Pro-Life who have a lot of women in the movement. Not everything women do is helpful for women.

4. You claim feminism cares about men’s problems too but false rape allegations are irrelevant because 1 in 4 women will be raped

This is a non-sequitur. Feminism does care about some men’s problems with regards to equality. False rape allegations are relatively rare. In the UK the Crown Prosecution Service between 2011 to 2012 prosecuted around 5400 rapes and 35 false accusations. Finland has the highest false rape report rate at 20% but the problem is Finland considers “intoxication” as evidence for “buyer’s remorse”. The fact remains that roughly 15 to 20% of women will be raped in their life time (a number that is falling thanks to changes) and of that around 30% will ever try to seek justice and within that 30% roughly 1 to 5% are false rape allegations.

Now the MRA demand that we make it harder to bring up rape despite the fact that even today just 30% of rape victims ever seek justice  because the rest are simply told that they cannot form a case or are so ashamed that by the time they come forward no case can be made. It’s like suggesting we make it harder to form cases of murder because people fake their deaths.

None of these things are related. And you know what reduces false rape allegations? Real rapes getting prosecuted would drop the percentage of false rape accusations since people who are going to make false rape allegations are a fixed minority. If the report rate is 33% (for ease of calculations) and 35 rape cases are faked a year in all of the UK out of 5400 then the rate of false allegation is 0.65%. If we double the prosecution rate then the false allegation rate drops to 0.325%.

Making it more difficult to report rape is not going to help men and seriously? Let’s round up. If 99% (yes, I have tripled the rate of false allegations here) of rapes are real then surely we should try and make it easier for the 99% than for the sad 1% of victims?

Or perhaps, if we have a proper report system the number of false allegations will go down because rapes are now properly investigated and so false accusations are more likely to come into the light.

Or is the allegation that the majority of rape allegations are false and that rape is just a feminist con to put men into prisons. Cause with the MRA who bloody knows.

5. You shame men  for shaming other men who don’t agree with MRA issues but any woman who does not agree with you is automatically a “gender traitor” and “rape apologist”.

The first and fourth point were “Rape Apologetics”. Just saying….

The MRA have real issues. It is just that they think the solution is to force women into unequality so that the unequality is justified.

And sure there are knee jerk responses but you know what? Taslima’s attitude to sex workers is harmful to them but that doesn’t mean Taslima is a gender traitor.

However me championing women’s rights makes me a beta male mangina.

6. You believe men only think men become feminists because they want to get laid, but also the only reason we tolerate female MRA is because we want to have sex with them.

No. Some  MRA think that male feminists are in it for the sex. Again see my above “beta male mangina” link.

I have run into female MRA. There was Renee Hendricks who insisted that the MRA were not bad. That all changed after her site “A Voice for Men” ran articles arguing for men’s rights in India and blaming women for their rapes and hiding a culture of sexual harassment and rape. Then there was Karen from A Voice for Men claiming that women in Afghanistan don’t have it so bad and implied that the Taliban were some sort of Monkey’s Paw or malicious genie that granted Afghan women the wish that they could all stay home and have men do all the work outside. Then there was Judgy Bitch and her lovely slut shaming of a minor.

I don’t pretend to understand what’s going on in the minds of MRA who think this way irrespective of their gender. But considering Renee specifically supported a body that was willing to ignore the rapes in India to prop up their idiotic dialogue? Considering Karen’s written an article  specifically designed to prop up the MRA viewpoint at the cost of women in Afghanistan (arguably the worst country on the planet to be a woman) and Judgy Bitch helped in the slut shaming and attacks on a young girl who had the audacity to NOT Want to date a Football Player and so who got raped for that and effectively ostracised in order to protect the sports career of the rapist.

And you want to hold up these women as ideals and paragons?

7. If your not a feminist your a bigot, but then you say that women have  every right to hate men

Judging by the behaviour of MRA? I think women have every right to hate Men’s Rights Activists.

Also? Considering historical  oppression and real life oppression, there is a lot of bias against women which explains the dislike and hate.

And want to know something? Most feminists are “straight” and “like” men. They think we are cute and sexy. They just wish we stopped harming them. That’s really all there is to it.

8. You constantly tell men to check their privilege but you refuse to acknowledge female privilege

Female privilege does exist but a lot of it has been broken down by feminists. In fact the lists of female privilege all seem to be made by men and all seem to be… stupid.

Literally the ones that are true are basically due to the perception of women’s incompetence. Women aren’t given high paid jobs because they are women and cannot handle it. Women aren’t expected to work because they are fragile little flowers whose tiny  hands are incapable of work. Women shouldn’t do dangerous jobs.

In fact the major benefits to being a woman off the top of my head?

Women have a variety of outfits that they can wear while men have to stick to a handful of archetypes.

Women can express emotions without ridicule while boys don’t cry.

See let us take an easy bake oven. An easy bake oven  emphasises the stereotype that women belong in the kitchen. It is harmful in it’s old state as a gender specific toy to girls. The newer models are uni-sex and sold and marketed to both genders. With the rise of the “metro” man and indeed the older “manly” foodie, baking and cooking are no longer female-centric.

The lists of female privilege is just laughable straw men. For god sake they still complain about the draft. This is a Vietnam War era argument and the MRA are still making it.

9. You find the idea of genital mutilation of a man being joked about on live television hysterically funny but claim misandry doesn’t exist.

A lot of feminists are anti-circumcision. Both Female and Male. Now Female genital mutilation is on many scales worse than the male equivalent, but we often see MRA derail conversations about FGM with conversations about men.

Humour punches up. Male circumcision and getting kicked in the crotch is funny for the same reason falling down the stairs is funny. It is because it is someone in power getting hurt by an attack on one of the things that gives him power. While hitting a woman is not funny since women are routinely hit by  men and it’s a major problem.

Misandry exists among the more radical feminists but you know what? They are a minority, they are a vocal minority but they rarely are the ones speaking about things. However if we compare the net social effect of misandry versus misogyny then the voice of radfems is not a major voice  while many MRA simply parrot things we take for granted.

10. You assert that women are strong, capable, never helpless or naive yet it’s society’s fault that women adhere to beauty standards and peer pressure. Implying that women are not smart enough to make healthy, intelligent decisions for themselves

No, no one says that. We say that women can be strong, capable and independent. However women don’t grow up in that environment and from a young age are told that they cannot do things.

We assert that men are physically strong, intelligent and capable of setting anything their minds to. Yet we cannot be nurses? What? Are we scared of blood? Bodily fluids? Sick people? Men can be doctors but not nurses? You know we don’t wear “hot nurse uniforms” anymore right? Are we not smart enough to make healthy, intelligent decisions bereft of the social and peer pressure of others?

Oh right, because social expectations and peer pressure define our actions as individuals. Women are bombarded with impossible bodies are told to meet certain standards to be accepted and have this behaviour as normalised.

There are people who interview women and rather than sticking to the topic, ask women about their fashion choices. Hell, let us look at the celebrities who strut down the red carpet at a gala event. Blokes? What movies they acted in, what their achievements are. Women? Dresses.

It can be called the weight of expectation, you aren’t just expected to be smart and strong and capable but also fashionable, attractive and cook well.

11. You claim that feminism accepts a woman’s choice to stay at home and be a housewife/mum and that feminism is a right to choose while calling women who reject feminism “baby makers” and “sex slaves”

Weird, I thought it was gender traitor and rape apologist. Women who stay at home aren’t rejecting feminism. However we do realise that women are expected to give up careers with greater frequency than men are. In addition due to the wage gap and difficulty of women to progress men are simply “better” off staying in a job. In addition men are derided for being “househusbands” making them less likely to be at home.

Now here is the thing, if the genders were balanced in how they were treated, there would be no issue with this. But as it stands, women staying at home is a thing mainly because women are expected to do so.

It’s just laughable, if the MRA really wanted to fight for men’s rights they would be pushing for the acceptance of house husbands rather than the denigration of feminists. And that’s basically the MRA in a nutshell.

Comments

  1. says

    Do you think women are equal to men apart from minor biological differencees and that women should be treated the same as men?

    I don’t think it’d matter if there were major biological differences – if you believe you should be treated fairly, you understand the concept of “fair” and “fairness” implies treating everyone that way. I know you know this; it’s not an issue that breaks along gender lines, it’s a matter of basic human fairness. If you think your friend with Down’s Syndrome should be treated fairly, then you’re an egalitarian and all the other stuff follows from that.

  2. says

    I have no problem with 50 Shades of Grey, it’s a silly book. It is erotica, not a manual on BDSM.

    I have to disagree with you on that topic. You’re right that it’s a book, and you’re right that it’s silly. It’s also horribly written crap. It’s about as erotic as used bubblegum. And it’s completely wrong about most of the BDSM stuff it tries to touch on – it reads more like it’s about an abusive relationship than a BDSM relationship. Of course there’s always a wide spectrum these things fall on, but it’s telling that the BDSM world’s reaction to 50 Shades has mostly been laughter.

  3. smhll says

    And that is why the SlutWalk exists. Because a lot of people’s defence against the rape of women is that they were dressed like sluts. They were asking for it.

    Yeah. Even if a heterosexual woman’s clothing is intended to say “Hey, I’d like some sexual attention”, that doesn’t make her like a loose ball in football (American football) that the rules say anyone can just jump on. The idea that pure or repressed women are worthy of respect and self-determination, but women who sometimes have sex and like it are fair game and acceptable targets is something we need to rethink. There are some toxic ideas out there that are found in almost every part of the world.

  4. says

    Had one on Twitter berating me about feminists lack of concern about male prison rape. So I pointed him to some links where the only organisation dedicated to improving prison conditions including focussing on prison rape had been promoted by feminist websites at least. Then pointed out it was mainly ran by women who were clearly feminists given their backgrounds in sociology… Also why should feminists fight for men’s rights necessarily? The movement is focussed on women’s rights! So then asked him to show me what MRAs had done, was a little worried as I assumed they had done something. A fund raiser for that organisation at least?

    Nope, he couldn’t provide a single link for the MRMs efforts in that regard. Then said they had been too busy collecting feminist tears and they’d get around to it. To say I was amazed is an understatement, he didn’t seem to have any issues with this. Attacking feminism and feminists is the only thing they care about, men’s rights are a distant third. Unbelievable bunch of asshats.

  5. angharad says

    Re 7, there’s actually at least one study that shows that women who identify as feminist actually have better opinions of men than women who don’t. See eg here .

  6. opposablethumbs says

    Nice one, Avi. I wasn’t going to say anything, but then I realised that just nodding to myself and thinking “+1″ to the OP and all the comments would be inaudible.

    So,

    +1

  7. smrnda says

    Most MRA’s concern for issues affecting men never gets further than whining online, and then blaming women and feminism. At least feminists have spoken on issues like prison rape.

    All said, blaming feminism for not taking enough time to talk about issues affecting men is like complaining that the fire department isn’t pulling people over for speeding, and that the cops aren’t putting out fires.

  8. Athywren says

    7. If your not a feminist your a bigot, but then you say that women have every right to hate men

    Does any feminist assert that not being a feminist makes you a bigot? I’ve heard quite a few claim that being actively opposed to feminism (that is, actively opposed to the recognition of women as human beings with equal rights and opportunities to those enjoyed by men) makes you a bigot, but never that simply failing to be a feminist makes you one.
    Maybe this is an argument from ignorance on my point – maybe there are some feminists out there who claim that everyone who isn’t a feminist is a bigot.
    Ok. So what? What does that have to do with hating men? I’m a feminist and I completely despise at least five women. What does that have to do with anything?
    Individual women are free to hate individual men. Individual men are free to hate individual women. Women can also hate women, and men can hate men. What does that have to do with recognising an entire group of humanity as fellow human beings? Some humans suck, and you’re perfectly well within your rights to hate them, but you still have to recognise that they’re human beings and that they have rights.

    This one is just nonsense. I mean, they’re all pretty ridiculous, but the conflation of personal animosity with bigotry is just so…. Let’s just say that it’s quite obvious that more time was put into thinking about how it made feminists look bad if you didn’t take the time to consider what words mean, than how well it made an actual point with any bearing on reality.

    10. You assert that women are strong, capable, never helpless or naive yet it’s society’s fault that women adhere to beauty standards and peer pressure. Implying that women are not smart enough to make healthy, intelligent decisions for themselves

    I do love this one. Point out that women are able to be strong and capable, just like men are, and we’re asserting that they’re never helpless or naive. No, women are humans. Not all humans are strong and capable. Some humans are helpless and naive. But all humans are humans.
    Men are susceptible to beauty standards and peer pressure too. It’s just that our beauty standards are more about not going bald or grey, while women’s are more about starving themselves half to death in the pursuit of a body shape that only a percentage of them will ever be able to attain. Our peer pressures are about becoming high-flying CEOs or macho men’s men who eat steaks and drive trucks made of steaks, while theirs are about having babies and not worrying their pretty little heads about whatever the current pretty little head worriers are.
    The funny thing about women being “smart enough to make healthy, intelligent decisions for themselves,” is that this line gets pulled out whenever people are trying to give women options for them to intelligently, and healthily decide upon for themselves, and certain groups of unnamed people want to oppose those options. Why are we condescending to women, they ask, outrage at the sheer misogyny of it cracking their voices, by telling them that they must rely on government to make their choices for them? No! This option must be removed from the table! We must treat women like the smart, intelligent people they are! By restricting the options available to them… by only allowing them to intelligently, healthily make the decisions we want them to make. It’s bullshit, and it’s transparent, which makes for an interesting metaphor and dangerous walking.

    Ah well, at least it didn’t trot out the old “YOU THINK ALL MEN ARE RAPISTS!!!!!” line. I fucking hate that one. True, it does allow you to come back with the actual facts and show that feminists believe men to be capable of being as good as we wish to be, even including the dizzying heights of not-rapist-dom, and also to point out that MRAs, with their insistence that “consent” is an excessive and unattainable goal, and that educating men about it is misandry of the highest order demonstrate a far lower opinion of men… but it’s still really tedious.

    @oolon

    Then said they had been too busy collecting feminist tears and they’d get around to it.

    Heh, that would be funny if not for two things:
    1) It’s a joke stolen straight from feminists mocking MRAs for their insistence that feminists are evil. Silly sods can’t even be original.
    2) I honestly think they think they’re being serious.

    It seems to be a fairly common theme amongst them that the overthrow of the feminist dominion over western culture is more important than actually doing anything to defend men or their rights, since how can they do anything for men when they’re being ground down under the pressure of the matriarchy? I have to wonder if any of them actually believe this shit, or if they just think that we’re naive enough to fall for it?

  9. Schlumbumbi says

    Humour punches up. Male circumcision and getting kicked in the crotch is funny for the same reason falling down the stairs is funny. It is because it is someone in power getting hurt by an attack on one of the things that gives him power. While hitting a woman is not funny since women are routinely hit by men and it’s a major problem.

    Ok, give me a second to breath, because this is the 1st time I’m seriously angry at a blogger.

    Humour punches up ? Male infants are “up” ? It’s funny to brutalise a male babies’ genitalia because “women are routinely hit by men” ?

    This is on the same level as “you deserve to be raped”. Avicenna, what you wrote up there, is full blown baby rape apologia. You have attracted enough attention in the past for sloppy thinking and writing, so your articles were never hold to very high standards – but this article has crossed a line.

  10. Athywren says

    Humour punches up ? Male infants are “up” ? It’s funny to brutalise a male babies’ genitalia because “women are routinely hit by men” ?

    Are the circumcision jokes on tv often aimed at male babies? Personally, I don’t recall seeing a single circumcision joke in my life, so I have no context by which to judge it, but the quote he was responding to seemed to imply adult men to me.

  11. says


    Implying that women are not smart enough to make healthy, intelligent decisions for themselves

    No, no one says that.

    Well, I might say that. I’m more likely to say, though, that many people aren’t smart enough. (Take some MRA’s, for example!) I can be an arrogant jerk like that sometimes.

    Now here is the thing, if the genders were balanced in how they were treated, there would be no issue with this. But as it stands, women staying at home is a thing mainly because women are expected to do so.

    Off topic a bit, but I have been irritated with a few women who call themselves feminists who say they are fighting for feminism through their choice to stay at home. Because feminism is about the right to choose, they say, and they are taking that right. OK…but their choice falls within gender stereotypes, so it is not logical to claim they are fighting for feminism through this choice. I’m not suggesting that they aren’t the feminists they claim, just that their choice to follow their gender stereotype is not going to do anything to advance feminist causes. That particular claim is bogus.

  12. says

    And in general, men who are NOT circumcised are made fun of… I wonder if the author is circumcised or not… being an ex-hindu….

  13. Kent_Hovind says

    The number one sign you are a feminist is being a devil-worshiping atheist. You will stand before God and Jesus and be judged, and you will have to explain your feminist slut walks to him.

    “Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.”

    Leave it to a feminist to decide that God’s Law is no match for their own lust to sin.

  14. Schlumbumbi says

    @12 Athywren — Choose freely.

    On the one end of the spectrum, you have benevolent assholes like Rabbi Harold Kushner telling a joke about circumcising male babies in front of a “sophisticated” audience (and maybe you remember how Hitchens reacted to this)…
    On the other end of the spectrum, you have the certified thunderc*nt Sharon Osbourne on “The View” panel, crying tears of laughter because some guy got his penis chopped off by his divorced wife, who then threw it into the garbage disposal. Needless to say the audience was enthusiastic about this hilarious news flash.

    Why exactly do males not only deserve the mutiliation of their genitalia, but public humiliation on top of it ? Because “patriarchy” ? Really ? If some imaginary phenomenon is sufficient to justify the brutalising of an individual person, then any reason is good enough to brutalise anyone else as well. And in that case, you should be laughing your asses off about rape and rape jokes … c’mon, louder, I can’t hear you.

  15. leni says

    3. You demand men take ownership of their lives while simultaneously blaming all your problems on the Patriarchy

    Oh they got me! And I was so close to getting though the list >< I blame all my problems on the patriarchy, it's true. I shall now enumerate them as penance: (This is going to be a very long post. I have a lot of problems and patriarchy must be blamed for each and every one of them.)

    1. My 1997 Buick died a few weeks ago leaving me in the lurch as there are no public buses to the area where I work. Fuck you. patriarchy! And your car killing penis vibes too!

    2. My couch has this uncomfortable trench that is "coincidentally" exactly where I like to sit. I love my couch, but fuck you again patriarchy. Please stop ruining my couch.

    3. I have these huge knots in the muscles at the base of my skull that give me these horrible tension headaches that feel like ice picks being driven into my skull in a totally unrelated area for no apparent reason. I'm quite sure it was caused by patriarchy ruining my couch ergonomics while I'm away at work.

    4. Patriarchy forgot to clean the litterbox again. Does it hate cats because of the whole pussy thing? That just seems unfair.

    5. Someone keeps stealing my mail. I'm pretty sure it's the patriarchy, but I can't prove it. However there is a shady church across the street and we all know patriarchy is attracted to churches like flies to shit. The whole thing is very suspicious.

    6. My rent went up for the second time in 12 years. Clearly the patriarchy got to my landlord.

    7. Why is cable so expensive anyway? Once again, patriarchy!

    8. I have this super annoying bang colic.Obviously the patriarchy put it there and then sold me the overpriced ceramic straightener that I "need" to fix it.

    9. I'm bored now. Also patriarchy's fault. But also tired. Because believe me this post would go one for days otherwise.

    ***

    Yeah. I wish the blame were that easy to.hand out, Abd I wishg evryib

  16. latsot says

    Marcus:

    I have to disagree with you on that topic. You’re right that it’s a book, and you’re right that it’s silly. It’s also horribly written crap. It’s about as erotic as used bubblegum.

    Which makes it equivalent to the vast majority of literotica. The main difference is that the book was best selling rather than something written on the Internet in all caps. Are we supposed to hold something to a higher standard because it’s written on trees? I’m not convinced. I haven’t read the book but my wife has. She found it silly, inaccurate and horribly-written crap. But she also found it erotic. Whatever does the trick, right? From what I understand, it wasn’t intended as an instruction manual but as fantasy. Lots of people enjoy science fiction even though it’s usually rather more inaccurate than 50 shades can possibly be. It’s even possible to enjoy badly-written sci-fi if it has a redeeming feature. For example, I’m a big fan of Iain M Banks’ sci-fi and other works. Much of the ‘science’ is preposterous and sometimes the ‘fiction’ is far from perfect. Some of his books don’t appear to have a story at all and he couldn’t seem to do endings very well. But I still enjoyed every book he wrote. I’m not saying that his work was badly written, far from it. I’m saying I like it even when it is flawed because of its many redeeming features.

    But I’m in danger of derailing here, sorry.

  17. latsot says

    @oolon

    Then said they had been too busy collecting feminist tears and they’d get around to it. To say I was amazed is an understatement, he didn’t seem to have any issues with this. Attacking feminism and feminists is the only thing they care about, men’s rights are a distant third.

    The only thing that surprises me is how poor MRAs are at obscuring their motives. Telling, isn’t it, that they are so often genuinely surprised when they’re asked to support their claims. They just don’t expect that they’d ever have to.

  18. latsot says

    Leo:

    OK…but their choice falls within gender stereotypes, so it is not logical to claim they are fighting for feminism through this choice.

    The important word is “choice”. Feminists fight for the ability to make that choice. How they subsequently use that choice is entirely up to individuals, which is entirely the point. When women can expect to be treated and paid equally to men at work then the idea of choice will be meaningless. Until then, the emphasis has to be on choice and specifically the limitations on choice that women – and not men – face.

  19. m0fa says

    I think women are equal to men apart from minor biological differences and that women should be treated the same as men….but I am NOT a feminist.
    Feminism is an ideology…it is a soco political movement, and as is the case with all other ideologies, it has flaws….it has so many flaw and is ‘steered’ by so many unproven assertions that I will not and can not identify as a feminist…but I still think that women are equal to men and should be treated with equal respect and be afforded the same opportunities in life. I identify as a humanist and a philogynist.

  20. Athywren says

    @Schlumbumbi, 16
    Fascinating as your accusations of misandry are, I was more interested in what support you had for the claim that the original statement that you were replying to is full blown baby rape apologia.

    So, here’s the thing, Avicenna says, “Humour punches up” – you know this, you quoted it. Now, to me, that suggests that, if it’s punching down, it’s not humour. You’re simply assuming that he considers jokes about infants punching up, because he didn’t explicitly specify, while talking about jokes about “genital mutilation of a man,” that he’s not talking about the genital mutilation of infants. I know that might seem strange, but men are not infants, do you see? So the important question is this: How do we tell when you’re punching up or down? It’s generally that it’s a joke which laughs at the actual suffering of a powerless or disadvantaged group. So jokes about atheists eating babies aren’t punching down since, despite babies, a pretty powerless group, being the subject, the joke is not about mocking babies who are eaten by atheists, but the nonsensical idea that it’s the sort of thing we would do, but a joke about eating the Donner party would be punching down, since that’s something that they supposedly had to do while in a seriously disadvantaged condition.
    So, do jokes about the genital mutilation of infant children count as punching up? No. Now, maybe Avicenna disagrees with me on that point, and I’m willing to concede that he may think it’s fair game if he corrects me, but what he said, combined with the understanding of what it means to punch up or down and his recognition of the anti-circumcision attitudes that are common among feminists without any obvious criticism of those attitudes, suggests that he in fact does not approve of jokes about infant circumcision, which might have been mentioned more explicitly if that was the topic being addressed.

    Now, bearing in mind that of your two examples of circumcision jokes, neither came from a feminist, and there is no evidence of feminists finding either funny, at least not that you have provided or is easily found online. There’s a lot of MRA ranting about how feminists find it funny, but that just demonstrates the MRA inability to distinguish “feminists” from “women.” There’s evidence of Hitchens (who, though he apparently wasn’t a fan of feminism, often cited the treatment of women, among others, as a major problem of religions, and said on several occasions that supporting the empowerment of women was a necessary part of making a successful society – feminist ideas, even if he was not a feminist) being opposed to the joke, but I don’t see how that’s evidence of feminists enjoying it.

    So… again, with a little less subtlety, where the fuck do you get the idea feminists support infant circumcision and rape, enjoy jokes about them, or even that Avicenna alone does?
    Does a reason matter to you, or do you just want to hurl accusations and pray that nobody is paying enough attention to see that they’re false and everyone takes your claims on faith?

  21. Jrod says

    It never ceases to amaze me that MRAs and their fellow travellers can still work themselves into a froth at feminists because of a bad joke Sharon Osbourne told more than two years ago. Never mind that Sharon Osbourne doesn’t even describe herself as a feminist and is hardly looked up to by feminists; it’s still proof that feminists hate men somehow. Never mind that the same people who treat Osbourne’s crummy joke as a human rights issue thought it was hilarious when Danial Tosh made a joke about gang-raping a woman on stage. Never mind that those same people think the Amazing Atheist is a great for telling rape victims that their rapist was a hero and that he hopes they die drowning in rape semen. Apparently that’s all cool. It’s different. Somehow.

    (Of course, one difference is that a man’s chances of being castrated are nearly zero while rape is as common as dirt, but again: never mind that.)

    Of course, now we can add to their mythology the time Avicenna advocated for mass castration because he thinks it’s funny. Of course, nothing of the sort happened, but neither did Rebecca Watson call for hitting on women to be outlawed. The truth doesn’t matter a bit to these supposed human-rights crusaders. They’re just looking for a way to justify their hatred and bigotry.

  22. Pitchguest says

    Since you like a bit of fisking, Avi, I’ll indulge you by doing a bit of fisking of my own.

    One by one, shall we?

    I was supposed to attend the Bangalore Slut Walk, it was cancelled when the right to assemble for women was revoked because of men. Men and conservatives who threatened women who were marching for the right to walk in India without harassment or risk and to not be shamed because of their clothes. It was cancelled roughly a year before Nirbhaya.
    Now no one will stop them.
    And that is why the SlutWalk exists. Because a lot of people’s defence against the rape of women is that they were dressed like sluts. They were asking for it. Well that argument was used by people in India who suggested the same thing for Nirbhaya.

    Not only are you evading the argument, but you are moving the goalposts. If feminists contend no one should be called a slut, then the point of Slutwalks are contradictory. Namely because the point of Slutwalks is not just to make the case that dressing skimpily is not deserving of rape, but also to rebrand the word ‘slut’ and take it back, making it a positive, not a negative, word. In fact, the argument doesn’t even mention the purpose of Slutwalks, just the contrary view of feminists saying this is good (Slutwalks) and this is bad (being called a slut).

    Oh, and if we’re going to be fair: Canada also launched the “Don’t be that guy” campaign, which meant to paint all men as potential rapists. It didn’t work out that well, according to this report: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/sexual-assaults-increased-in-2011-1.1287611

    Porn is changing a lot.

    Understatement of the century. Yes. If you care to look for it, there’s a market for all manner of porn. Not just “men objectifying women.” There are so many different kinds, it’s like an explicit hardware store. However if you have a one-track mind, like for instance Andrea Dworkin, then it doesn’t matter what the climate is. Women are objectified in porn. Women are taken advantage of in porn. Porn is bad for you. Period.

    Feminism is not a monolith …

    Oh man. That is funny. That is hilarious. Tell you what. I’m taking that and putting it in a folder. For later.

    And just because you own 50 Shades of Grey and enjoy a BDSM doesn’t mean you like being beaten up.

    What? How is this relevant to the argument? What the fuck are you talking about?

    Except men are more in control of their lives than women are and the fact that the police can stand up and blame women for being raped in Canada. We are still discussing Birth Control access over decisions made by men. We are still discussing Abortion.

    As far as I know, the issue of abortion (I don’t know about birth control) is a matter of mandate. By the masses. In other words, the majority decides. Are you saying that no woman ever have voted against abortion? Are you saying that women have never been the deciding factor on which to outlaw abortion, say in a state in the United States, by orders of magnitude? It’s always been men having their grubby little hands everywhere, always wanting to oppress and subjugate?

    And feminists don’t just blame the patriarchy but also other things that cause harm. Many feminists mock “Fashion Magazines” which are primarily run by women. Many feminists fight for pro-Choice against Pro-Life who have a lot of women in the movement. Not everything women do is helpful for women.

    No. Shit. Sherlock. But, really? You don’t think it’s a conspiracy by the patriarchy to make women fight amongst themselves? No? You mean they actually have agency of their own, able to make their own decisions and choose of their own volition to disagree with other women without some invisible shadow daddy government watching and influencing their every move? Shut up!

    This is a non-sequitur. Feminism does care about some men’s problems with regards to equality.

    That so? I honestly couldn’t tell. So if I were to go places like Jezebel and say I was falsely accused of rape, they would be sympathetic to my cause? Do you think? Maybe not Jezebel. Bad example. They’re a bit too radical. How about Skepchick?

    Now the MRA demand that we make it harder to bring up rape despite the fact that even today just 30% of rape victims ever seek justice because the rest are simply told that they cannot form a case or are so ashamed that by the time they come forward no case can be made. It’s like suggesting we make it harder to form cases of murder because people fake their deaths.

    The MRA does? Interesting.

    The first and fourth point were “Rape Apologetics”. Just saying….

    What a fucking stupid thing to say. Good grief.

    The MRA have real issues. It is just that they think the solution is to force women into unequality so that the unequality is justified.

    The MRA? Again. Interesting.

    And sure there are knee jerk responses but you know what? Taslima’s attitude to sex workers is harmful to them but that doesn’t mean Taslima is a gender traitor.

    Indeed. Walking away from feminism makes you a gender traitor.

    However me championing women’s rights makes me a beta male mangina.

    Some asshole saying you’re a beta male is an indictment of the MRA? And you added the “mangina” because I guess you weren’t victimised enough? Poor dear.

    No. Some MRA think that male feminists are in it for the sex. Again see my above “beta male mangina” link.

    Some decor! A qualifier! Let’s see if you can keep that up. Oh, and a double deliberate misquote? You must really be in need of some virtual hugs.

    I have run into female MRA. There was Renee Hendricks who insisted that the MRA were not bad. That all changed after her site “A Voice for Men” ran articles arguing for men’s rights in India and blaming women for their rapes and hiding a culture of sexual harassment and rape.

    Two things: One. Renee Hendricks is not an MRA. That’s your first error. And two, “A Voice for Men” is definitely not her site. Back to subterfuge are we, Avi?

    I don’t pretend to understand what’s going on in the minds of MRA who think this way irrespective of their gender. But considering Renee specifically supported a body that was willing to ignore the rapes in India to prop up their idiotic dialogue?

    What? You are talking out of your arse.

    And you want to hold up these women as ideals and paragons?

    Is that what was being claimed? I thought the claim was,

    You believe men only think men become feminists because they want to get laid, but also the only reason we tolerate female MRA is because we want to have sex with them.

    Doesn’t say anything about ideals and paragons, does it, dickhead?

    Judging by the behaviour of MRA? I think women have every right to hate Men’s Rights Activists.

    Nope. Couldn’t do it, apparently. Here’s what so absolutely wrong about this statement, Avi. If you remember I said I would tag a comment and use it later and here it is. You said “feminism is not a monolith.” What’s funny about that is, I agree. Feminism is most definitely NOT a monolith. And then you pull this bullshit. If feminism is not a monolith and feminism cannot be criticised in that context, then why should the MRM be smeared in that way? Are you incapable of noticing your own hypocrisy?

    Do you even care? I’ve seen many feminists say things like this all the time: The MRA’s are descipable people. The MRA’s believe this and that. (All bad.) Generalisations based on the actions of a few. If I’m to judge feminism, then should I look to people like Rebecca Watson? Maybe Anita Sarkeesian? How about Suey Park? These people have said and done immensely stupid things. Which means I can say feminists say stupid things and not be wrong, can’t I? I don’t need a qualifier, do I? People should just realise I’m talking about these seperate people and not ALL feminists. Right?

    And want to know something? Most feminists are “straight” and “like” men. They think we are cute and sexy. They just wish we stopped harming them. That’s really all there is to it.

    Real comedian you are. By the way, have you read the latest statistics on domestic abuse by women?

    The lists of female privilege is just laughable straw men. For god sake they still complain about the draft. This is a Vietnam War era argument and the MRA are still making it.

    And the list of male privilege is a laughable strawman, as it as well derives from a different era. How many times haven’t you heard “How many women have been presidents?” Well, not many, but if I recall there was that one time that was very close. When was that? Oh yeah. In 2008. That is if you don’t include other countries than the US, in which case wowee. I mean, I mustn’t have got the memo where it said that women nowadays are prohibited from becoming presidents. But, of course, it always comes back to what once were, and not what is. Which brings me to the argument about the draft. Feminists (see, I’m doing it again!) contend that we live in a patriarchal society that oppresses and subjugates women, and have lived in such a society for a long time – centuries, milennia, epochs, whatever – but then what about the draft? Men were sent away to die as cannon fodder. Why? To put women in their place? Please. And the draft isn’t gone forever. It’s just suspended. But at least if there’s a war on now, they won’t just exclusively enlist men.

    A lot of feminists are anti-circumcision. Both Female and Male. Now Female genital mutilation is on many scales worse than the male equivalent, but we often see MRA derail conversations about FGM with conversations about men.
    Humour punches up. Male circumcision and getting kicked in the crotch is funny for the same reason falling down the stairs is funny. It is because it is someone in power getting hurt by an attack on one of the things that gives him power. While hitting a woman is not funny since women are routinely hit by men and it’s a major problem.

    And once again, this is the stupidest, if not the most disgusting, statement you’ve ever written. Fucking hell.

    Misandry exists among the more radical feminists but you know what? They are a minority, they are a vocal minority but they rarely are the ones speaking about things. However if we compare the net social effect of misandry versus misogyny then the voice of radfems is not a major voice while many MRA simply parrot things we take for granted.

    Oh. Well, I’m glad you’re here, Avi, to assert what constitutes as radical feminism and what doesn’t.

    What constitutes as a radical men’s rights activist? Oh, right.

    No, no one says that. We say that women can be strong, capable and independent. However women don’t grow up in that environment and from a young age are told that they cannot do things.

    Yes. Yes, they do. Almost every feminist on the planet has one time or another said or otherwise implied that. In fact, what you just said right there “women don’t grow up in that environment” just proves their point. Only men – I’m sorry, boys – grow up in an environment where they can be strong, capable and independent? Girls never get that? Do you have any evidence to support this conclusion, or are you just pulling information out of your arse again?

    Weird, I thought it was gender traitor and rape apologist. Women who stay at home aren’t rejecting feminism. However we do realise that women are expected to give up careers with greater frequency than men are.

    What do you mean ‘expected to’? By whom? The invisible shadow daddy government?

    In addition due to the wage gap and difficulty of women to progress men are simply “better” off staying in a job. In addition men are derided for being “househusbands” making them less likely to be at home.

    Sounds like it’s a matter of culture. In my country, men (or husbands) staying at home is normal. They’re even encouraged to by the government.

    Now here is the thing, if the genders were balanced in how they were treated, there would be no issue with this. But as it stands, women staying at home is a thing mainly because women are expected to do so.

    In what era would that be?

    It’s just laughable, if the MRA really wanted to fight for men’s rights they would be pushing for the acceptance of house husbands rather than the denigration of feminists. And that’s basically the MRA in a nutshell.

    Irony. I do love me some irony.

  23. Pitchguest says

    #23 Athywren

    So, here’s the thing, Avicenna says, “Humour punches up” – you know this, you quoted it. Now, to me, that suggests that, if it’s punching down, it’s not humour. You’re simply assuming that he considers jokes about infants punching up, because he didn’t explicitly specify, while talking about jokes about “genital mutilation of a man,” that he’s not talking about the genital mutilation of infants. I know that might seem strange, but men are not infants, do you see?

    Infants are also not grown men who can consent to the operation and circumcision is not usually performed on grown men, now is it, you condescending imbecile?

  24. leni says

    Yeah. I wish the blame were that easy to.hand out, Abd I wishg evryib

    Lol. I was literally falling asleep when I typed that. Apparently I kept going with the thought while nodding off. Ooops!

    ***

    Pitchguest:

    In what era would that be?

    I don’t know where you live, but where Avi lives, and where I live, and probably where most of the human population lives, that expectation is still very much a reality. It isn’t for me, but I had a pretty privileged upbringing and a mother who (wisely) put me on pre-emptive birth control. I consider myself lucky and privileged in that regard, but that doesn’t mean it’s reasonable for me to expect the same is true of everyone everywhere.

    And because I understand what a powerful grip religion has on people, and because I also understand what that typically means for women, I have extra reasons to be cautious about assuming that even people who are like me in social and economic ways have had an experience like mine. In fact I don’t, given that I consider myself lucky to have not experienced it.

  25. leni says

    What do you mean ‘expected to’? By whom? The invisible shadow daddy government?

    He means other people. Probably because we are social animals.

    Not aliens. Not “the gubmint.” Not Sasquatch. Just garden variety asshole primates.

    Super shocking that social animals have stupid rules, I know. I can hardly believe it myself.

  26. leni says

    By the way, pitchguest, have you figured out yet if drugging and raping someone still sounds like a good idea in your head?

    Or are you still working that one out?

  27. Pitchguest says

    #29 leni:

    By the way, pitchguest, have you figured out yet if drugging and raping someone still sounds like a good idea in your head?

    Or are you still working that one out?

    What are you on about, you crazy person?

  28. Pitchguest says

    #27 leni:

    I don’t know where you live, but where Avi lives, and where I live, and probably where most of the human population lives, that expectation is still very much a reality.

    Oh, do tell, leni. Where do you live?

    It isn’t for me, but I had a pretty privileged upbringing and a mother who (wisely) put me on pre-emptive birth control. I consider myself lucky and privileged in that regard, but that doesn’t mean it’s reasonable for me to expect the same is true of everyone everywhere.

    Convenient that it didn’t apply to you, wherever it is that you come from, but I have no idea what this has to do with the expectation that women are supposed to give up their careers. Or are you saying that women give up careers because they don’t have sufficient access to birth control, or that they are too ignorant to know of its use?

    And because I understand what a powerful grip religion has on people, and because I also understand what that typically means for women, I have extra reasons to be cautious about assuming that even people who are like me in social and economic ways have had an experience like mine. In fact I don’t, given that I consider myself lucky to have not experienced it.

    I… I’m lost. What? What are you talking about? Please tell me.

    He means other people. Probably because we are social animals.

    Oh, I see. Other people. Well, of course. Why didn’t I think of that? Tell me, leni. Who are these ‘other people’? Co-workers? Bosses? Friends? Family? Now I’m really curious to know where you live.

  29. Athywren says

    Infants are also not grown men who can consent to the operation and circumcision is not usually performed on grown men, now is it, you condescending imbecile?

    That’s adorable. Are jokes about men breastfeeding also punching down, since men do not usually breastfeed? I can make a link from this joke to infants, therefore it corresponds directly to infants! MISANDRYYYY!!!!!!
    You’re funny.

  30. says

    Given the level of cluelessness about basic social interactions that Pitchguest evinces, it’s amazing he manage to make it through an ordinary day without getting arrested.

  31. Pitchguest says

    That’s adorable. Are jokes about men breastfeeding also punching down, since men do not usually breastfeed? I can make a link from this joke to infants, therefore it corresponds directly to infants! MISANDRYYYY!!!!!!
    You’re funny.

    Ah, so breastfeeding is comparable to genital mutilation, you disgusting little creep?

    You make me sick.

  32. says

    Except there are clear and accepted benefits to circumcision in men, you keep trying to equate it’s severity to FGM and it simply doesn’t work.

    And are you done insulting people here? I did warn you before about bullying and insults. If you cannot be polite? Go do something else.

    LIke flower arranging or something.

  33. Pitchguest says

    Pardon me. It must have been my cluelessness about basic social interactions.

    I’m sorry I felt passionate about Athywren’s absurd statement comparing breastfeeding to cutting off a part of a male infant’s penis. I will do better next time.

  34. Pitchguest says

    And there are clear benefits to circumcision?

    Oh dear.

    Time to bring this clip out again:

  35. leni says

    Oh, do tell, leni. Where do you live?

    I live in the US, which is inhabited by millions of raging religious assholes who believe a lot of stupid shit about gender roles. I got lucky, I wasn’t born to people who are raging religious assholes. Lots of other people aren’t so lucky.

    … I have no idea what this has to do with the expectation that women are supposed to give up their careers. Or are you saying that women give up careers because they don’t have sufficient access to birth control, or that they are too ignorant to know of its use?

    I’m saying I never had to make a choice between children and career because I was on birth control before I was sexually active (and before I made the decision that I never, ever wanted children). I also lived in a place where I could get affordable birth control and abortion, even if I had to walk through lines of picketing assholes to get it. I consider myself goddamn lucky in that regard. Lots of people aren’t so lucky. Most, probably.

    I… I’m lost. What? What are you talking about? Please tell me.

    No shit, Sherlock. You are perpetually lost. Let me explain, again: My circumstances were not the norm. I know that, therefore it would not be rational for me to assume other peoples’ experiences were like mine. I know that pressure exists even if it wasn’t a specific experience for me. It was for my mother, it was for my sister who later in life adopted some pretty stupid religious ideas, and it was for many of my friends. And I have certainly read about many other people who experience it.

    Clearly this is difficult for you, but it is possible to understand what things are like for other people.

    Oh, I see. Other people. Well, of course. Why didn’t I think of that? Tell me, leni. Who are these ‘other people’? Co-workers? Bosses? Friends? Family? Now I’m really curious to know where you live.

    Yes. All those things you listed are possibilities of being significant forces of social pressure, aka “other people”, in a persons’ life. Well done, you’ve mastered several nouns.

  36. leni says

    By the way, pitchguest, have you figured out yet that drugging and raping people sounds as bad out loud as it did in your head?

  37. Schlumbumbi says

    @23 Athywren — (Sorry for late answer)

    (1) Baby rape apologia

    because he didn’t explicitly specify, while talking about jokes about “genital mutilation of a man,” that he’s not talking about the genital mutilation of infants. I know that might seem strange, but men are not infants, do you see?

    Male circumcision is almost exclusively perpetrated on infants and minors, and therefor never consentual. You know this, I know this, Avi knows this.

    And now read his original paragraph again. He made no effort to associate the hilarity of male circumcision with adulthood, because that’s not what he meant. He had ample opportunity to clear things up, had this been a misunderstanding, but what does he do instead ? Doubling down, telling us how all the alleged benefits of that procedure would irrefutably override any concerns we might have over its misanthropic overtones. Thanks a bunch, oh enlightened one.

    Look, it’s not only his complete disregard for peoples’ bodily autonomy and sexual integrity that enrages me, but the audacity to mock the victims as if they were too stupid to understand that it was all done in their favor. This is en-par with, maybe even worse than, “you asked for it”. This is full blown rapism.

    BTW: Should you ever wonder where a “reasonable” and educated young man gets such atrocious ideas from, look no further than Taslima Nasreen’s explanation right here on FTB.

    http://freethoughtblogs.com/taslima/2012/12/27/india-the-land-of-eroticism-sexism-and-rapism/

    (2) No feminists find this funny.

    Now, bearing in mind that of your two examples of circumcision jokes, neither came from a feminist, and there is no evidence of feminists finding either funny,

    What are the chances that even a single panelist on “The Talk” does not self-identify as a feminist ? Zero ? Close to zero ? But that’s besides the point. What was so shocking about this incident was not that 1 single crazy person (Osbourne) put her violent misandry on display, but that it was cheered and applauded on by the entire audience. If you’re looking for evidence of rape culture, you’ve just found it. It’s just not what you thought it was.

    And although I acknowledge that even some of the former crazies (e.g. Jezebel) are finally coming clean about some issues they used to gaslight, or even outright ignore, e.g. female-on-male rape, Avicenna’s atittude is still located nowhere else but in the “agent orange” radfem camp.

  38. says

    Oh, and if we’re going to be fair: Canada also launched the “Don’t be that guy” campaign, which meant to paint all men as potential rapists.

    The fact that Pitchguest is still repeating this long-debunked load of crap just proves how deeply uncaring and uneducable he is.

  39. says

    I think women are equal to men apart from minor biological differences and that women should be treated the same as men….but I am NOT a feminist.

    There are plenty of people who proudly call themselves “feminist” without embracing any of the (unspecified) things you find objectionable about feminism. So it’s pretty lame for you to explicitly support the basic principles of feminism and then insist you’re not a feminist because feminism also allegedly supports other (unspecified) things that most actual feminists also don’t really support.

  40. Schlumbumbi says

    @42 Raging Bee

    Nope. That’s not how it works.
    If you gather under an umbrella, you have to own the good and the bad. You don’t get to pick and chose. The crazies are part of your movement.

  41. says

    No medical procedure done to children involves their consent. Do you think children consent to vaccinations? If you asked any child whether they wanted a vaccine they would say no.

    So the bodily autonomy argument is frankly idiotic. No surgical procedure can be done to a child because most children do not want to get cut open or feel pain. The simple treatment of a tooth decay is now a monsterous insult against personal integrity.

    Or you know? Parents get to decide for their kids as kids do not have the mental capacity to make judgement calls.

  42. latsot says

    @Schlumbumbi:

    If you gather under an umbrella, you have to own the good and the bad.

    What? No you don’t. Part of being in a movement – perhaps the only reason I’ve ever seen to be part of one in the first place – is to try to get rid of the bits you don’t like. The idea that if a movement exists you have to either accept every single part of it or avoid it altogether might be the single most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.

    If you vote conservative, does that mean you agree with every single policy of the Tory party? If you’re a Christian, does that mean you agree with the proclamation that wearing a combination of fabrics is an abomination unto the lord? People *clearly* identify as belonging to certain categories without necessarily agreeing with everything those categories traditionally represent. And who decides what views belong to which categories anyway if it’s not the people who identify with them?

    Are you actually serious?

  43. says

    Yes, Schlumbumbi, that IS how it works — your “umbrella” analogy is lame and simpleminded even by MRA standards.

    And no, “the crazies” do NOT “control” “our” movement. If you want that tired old accusation to be taken seriously, you’ll have to at least specify who you’re talking about, otherwise you have no case. Name names or shut up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>