Says a guy at pubshare, and he ought to know.
He starts with a picture of a not-hot woman saying women are not for decoration, while hot women laugh at her. Geddit? Feminists ugly, hot women not feminists. Ugly women feminists because ugly, hot women not feminists because not ugly.
Then he explains that provocation gets hits, so when women talk about sexist shit, they’re just making sexist shit more popular.
Feminists always feel the need to fight misogyny. To fight the trolls. To voice their disagreement. Sorry feminists, but when you do that all you do is empower the people you are trying to destroy. You bring eyeballs to an article that says the opposite of what you think, and what I think too. People will not remember your blurb on Facebook saying why you hate this article, they will remember the article itself. You cannot change someone’s mind in a comment war. All you can do is deliver an awful message to bad people. No matter your intentions, more people read misogynistic trash because you are sharing it.
So if feminists shut up about it, it will go away! He says so.
There is plenty of good feminist writing out there. Jezebel is wonderful. Share that. Don’t share the Slate article that blames women for getting raped. If feminists ignore that Slate article, Slate will not post it again. End of story.
So to the feminists, I have a challenge for you. Next time you see an article that hates on women, don’t share it. Don’t comment on it. Don’t voice your outrage. Roll your eyes and move on. Because if enough of you do, those types of articles will cease to exist. We in this business have no sexist agenda. We just want an engaged audience. When you hate, we win. So stop hating and we’ll stop writing.
See? He said so. All we have to do is shut up, and it will all go away.
He doesn’t say how long that will take though.
And if you see a burning cross on your lawn, ignore it and the KKK will lose interest and go away.
Our old friends – accommodation and civility.
Ignore the trolls and bullies. That tactic hasn’t worked for millennia but this time it’ll work for sure. This guy on the internet said so and the internet never lies!
And then you get the inverse, where they accuse feminists of posting ‘just for blog hits’. So is this a self-admission of projection?
What is this whole hot vs not hot woman thing? As far as I can see hotness is a kind of performance, a statement that you will fit into certain gender roles and expectations.
And what is this whole “fuckable” bullshit? I think it means that a man would not be too badly disparaged by his peers for taking a sexual interest in that woman. Women being sex objects is a major step up from being peer status objects. That would respect the diversity of male desire and could lead to a standard of respect for women’s consent.
Francisco, you said “Women being sex objects is a major step up from being peer status objects. ” but I don’t see how. The important word in both sentences is “objects”. Neither role grants women any volition, and therefore there is no reason that women’s consent would be any more important.