Why are you a Feminist?

[BigBallinStalin]

If person A criticizes a movement, you think that person A knows better than all the women within that movement. This is silly; perhaps you think there are no male feminists? Anyway, it's the underlying logic with your position. You remind me of the staunch welfare government advocate who insists that the free market guy wants poor people to die because he doesn't support the government provision of welfare.

Nope. That's what Freddy thinks Sady wants. Here's what Sady wants:

When Sady says "shut the f*ck up", she's not actually going for closing off the conversation. She's responding forcefully, and with some comedy, to the overwhelming privilege that men feel they should be allowed to be in everything, including, apparently, a place designated as a safe space for women to talk about feminism, and other things, without having to put up with the same shit they have to everywhere else. This is an issue that Americans in particular have, thinking that the right to free speech trumps everyone else's right to not have to listen to you, but it's an international problem as well. If a woman wants a man's opinion on feminism, she can go to reddit, or a news website, or outside her door. If she wants to laugh a bit and work on serious shit with other women without having to explain to a dude for the umpteenth time how "man-hating" is a phrase (and has been for decades) used to ridicule and intellectually demote the feminist movement as a whole despite the fact that it certainly does apply to some feminists, she can go to Tiger Beatdown. Again, Sady doesn't want all men to shut up about feminism. She appreciates plenty of men with feminist perspectives. She wants people like Freddy to consider his perspectives a bit more, especially because he is calling himself a feminist. There might be some "You don't agree with me" going on there, as it will go for any discussion with more than one side, but the majority of her point is to explain why the blog is a safe place, and it's exactly because of guys like Freddy. And I almost feel for the guy. I've read his blog posts on the topic, and he tries to be polite and makes an argument that is a sound one (guys can be feminists), though completely unnecessary (because everyone knows that already) and seems to completely miss the point as to why he isn't allowed to post on Tiger Beatdown. Which is another reason why he can't post on TB. It's a vicious circle.

So, Sady is trying to be funny (she mentions it's her livelihood) and make some points. What's not to like?

That criticism was aimed at your position, not Sady's, so I don't see the relevance here. The underlined is your position when applied consistently. If you don't like that, then why not acknowledge its silly implications?

But let's advance. Here's my general position on feminism:

JB is marketing Feminism 4.0 or 3.0---I forget which wave it is. The earlier waves received a lot of flak because they ultimately advocated for inequality and sometimes radical positions, which were simply ridiculous. With Feminism 3.0, it's unnecessary to even support such a movement because of its history. If you're against Feminism 3.0, it's not the case that you're against women or equal rights--of course, the advocates for Feminism 3.0 would likely say otherwise; perhaps that tactic is part of the marketing plan too.

Feminism is a niche market. They're free to do whatever, as long as they're not hurting others. I'm simply not impressed, and regarding analytical frameworks, they don't have anything valuable to offer to me, but at least they've been driving themselves away from radicalism.

Thanks? Another dude monologuing about what he thinks feminism is and should be. Which is cool, I guess, but not the sort of thing I normally give two shits about, other than noting that it's occurring with snide one-liners.

I'm sorry that feminism is not useful for specific matters, but there's nothing wrong with that. Other analytical frameworks vary in their usefulness too.

It may be easy for you to disparage someone's criticism without reflecting on it seriously, but why not give it a shot? If a woman said the same, (and I've conversed with a few who hold similar opinions), then what would your response be?
(The "your not a woman" defense is as groundless as the "your not a Muslim; therefore ur argument is invalid!" defense).


In general, it's difficult to understand your position. Reading your response to TGD's is equally confusing. Are you emotionally responding to your own strawmen fallacies? Is that primarily the problem here?

[Neoteny]

Oh, well my position is that this thread was pretty lame, serving as an echo chamber for a bunch of dudes unfamiliar with feminism. Also, Sady Doyle is hilarious and sometimes I steal her lines.

EDIT: I forgot the part about how people involved in a subject are more likely to be better contributors, but it's probably for the best since it will be reduced to a straw man about how nobody can talk about anything while criticizing me for making a straw man argument.

[notyou2]

Women are nurturers, healers, comforters. They make sound decisions based on their perceptions and situational influences. They are peacemakers. They are good with money. I believe they lie less.

In my opinion, humankind would be better off if women were in a superior position in politics and government and men were in the inferior position. I think the world in general would be safer, saner, and a more hospitable place to raise your family and earn a living.

[john9blue]

Women are nurturers, healers, comforters. They make sound decisions based on their perceptions and situational influences. They are peacemakers. They are good with money. I believe they lie less.

have you ever been married? just curious. IIRC you are older than most of us.

[john9blue]

You've completely missed the point. Indeed, Sady specifically says that a dude can be a contributing feminist. But until he is one, he might want to shut the f*ck up for a little while.

so basically, unless we agree with her opinion, we should shut the f*ck up.

can't say i expected anything more logical from her.

BTW neo, would you consider this an adequate summary of her position?

[Neoteny]

You've completely missed the point. Indeed, Sady specifically says that a dude can be a contributing feminist. But until he is one, he might want to shut the f*ck up for a little while.

so basically, unless we agree with her opinion, we should shut the f*ck up.

can't say i expected anything more logical from her.

BTW neo, would you consider this an adequate summary of her position?

When Sady says "shut the f*ck up", she's not actually going for closing off the conversation. She's responding forcefully, and with some comedy, to the overwhelming privilege that men feel they should be allowed to be in everything, including, apparently, a place designated as a safe space for women to talk about feminism, and other things, without having to put up with the same shit they have to everywhere else. This is an issue that Americans in particular have, thinking that the right to free speech trumps everyone else's right to not have to listen to you, but it's an international problem as well. If a woman wants a man's opinion on feminism, she can go to reddit, or a news website, or outside her door. If she wants to laugh a bit and work on serious shit with other women without having to explain to a dude for the umpteenth time how "man-hating" is a phrase (and has been for decades) used to ridicule and intellectually demote the feminist movement as a whole despite the fact that it certainly does apply to some feminists, she can go to Tiger Beatdown. Again, Sady doesn't want all men to shut up about feminism. She appreciates plenty of men with feminist perspectives. She wants people like Freddy to consider his perspectives a bit more, especially because he is calling himself a feminist. There might be some "You don't agree with me" going on there, as it will go for any discussion with more than one side, but the majority of her point is to explain why the blog is a safe place, and it's exactly because of guys like Freddy. And I almost feel for the guy. I've read his blog posts on the topic, and he tries to be polite and makes an argument that is a sound one (guys can be feminists), though completely unnecessary (because everyone knows that already) and seems to completely miss the point as to why he isn't allowed to post on Tiger Beatdown. Which is another reason why he can't post on TB. It's a vicious circle.

So, Sady is trying to be funny (she mentions it's her livelihood) and make some points. What's not to like?

[BigBallinStalin]

Oh, well my position is that this thread was pretty lame, serving as an echo chamber for a bunch of dudes unfamiliar with feminism. Also, Sady Doyle is hilarious and sometimes I steal her lines.

EDIT: I forgot the part about how people involved in a subject are more likely to be better contributors, but it's probably for the best since it will be reduced to a straw man about how nobody can talk about anything while criticizing me for making a straw man argument.

A succinct cop-out. Fare thee well!

You were getting a bit emotional back there, weren't you?

[john9blue]

You've completely missed the point. Indeed, Sady specifically says that a dude can be a contributing feminist. But until he is one, he might want to shut the f*ck up for a little while.

so basically, unless we agree with her opinion, we should shut the f*ck up.

can't say i expected anything more logical from her.

BTW neo, would you consider this an adequate summary of her position?

When Sady says "shut the f*ck up", she's not actually going for closing off the conversation. She's responding forcefully, and with some comedy, to the overwhelming privilege that men feel they should be allowed to be in everything, including, apparently, a place designated as a safe space for women to talk about feminism, and other things, without having to put up with the same shit they have to everywhere else. This is an issue that Americans in particular have, thinking that the right to free speech trumps everyone else's right to not have to listen to you, but it's an international problem as well. If a woman wants a man's opinion on feminism, she can go to reddit, or a news website, or outside her door. If she wants to laugh a bit and work on serious shit with other women without having to explain to a dude for the umpteenth time how "man-hating" is a phrase (and has been for decades) used to ridicule and intellectually demote the feminist movement as a whole despite the fact that it certainly does apply to some feminists, she can go to Tiger Beatdown. Again, Sady doesn't want all men to shut up about feminism. She appreciates plenty of men with feminist perspectives. She wants people like Freddy to consider his perspectives a bit more, especially because he is calling himself a feminist. There might be some "You don't agree with me" going on there, as it will go for any discussion with more than one side, but the majority of her point is to explain why the blog is a safe place, and it's exactly because of guys like Freddy. And I almost feel for the guy. I've read his blog posts on the topic, and he tries to be polite and makes an argument that is a sound one (guys can be feminists), though completely unnecessary (because everyone knows that already) and seems to completely miss the point as to why he isn't allowed to post on Tiger Beatdown. Which is another reason why he can't post on TB. It's a vicious circle.

So, Sady is trying to be funny (she mentions it's her livelihood) and make some points. What's not to like?

i must admit, i didn't think the mythical "SRS males" actually existed until this thread. i wonder if this is some kind of attempt to pick up women?

[Neoteny]

Oh, well my position is that this thread was pretty lame, serving as an echo chamber for a bunch of dudes unfamiliar with feminism. Also, Sady Doyle is hilarious and sometimes I steal her lines.

EDIT: I forgot the part about how people involved in a subject are more likely to be better contributors, but it's probably for the best since it will be reduced to a straw man about how nobody can talk about anything while criticizing me for making a straw man argument.

A succinct cop-out. Fare thee well!

You were getting a bit emotional back there, weren't you?

That has actually been my stance this whole time, along with being frustrated with people overreacting to an aggressive tone. It's not really my fault everyone was so up in arms over imagined demons about feminism.

Tell me more, BBS. Would you say I was hysterical?

[Neoteny]

You've completely missed the point. Indeed, Sady specifically says that a dude can be a contributing feminist. But until he is one, he might want to shut the f*ck up for a little while.

so basically, unless we agree with her opinion, we should shut the f*ck up.

can't say i expected anything more logical from her.

BTW neo, would you consider this an adequate summary of her position?

When Sady says "shut the f*ck up", she's not actually going for closing off the conversation. She's responding forcefully, and with some comedy, to the overwhelming privilege that men feel they should be allowed to be in everything, including, apparently, a place designated as a safe space for women to talk about feminism, and other things, without having to put up with the same shit they have to everywhere else. This is an issue that Americans in particular have, thinking that the right to free speech trumps everyone else's right to not have to listen to you, but it's an international problem as well. If a woman wants a man's opinion on feminism, she can go to reddit, or a news website, or outside her door. If she wants to laugh a bit and work on serious shit with other women without having to explain to a dude for the umpteenth time how "man-hating" is a phrase (and has been for decades) used to ridicule and intellectually demote the feminist movement as a whole despite the fact that it certainly does apply to some feminists, she can go to Tiger Beatdown. Again, Sady doesn't want all men to shut up about feminism. She appreciates plenty of men with feminist perspectives. She wants people like Freddy to consider his perspectives a bit more, especially because he is calling himself a feminist. There might be some "You don't agree with me" going on there, as it will go for any discussion with more than one side, but the majority of her point is to explain why the blog is a safe place, and it's exactly because of guys like Freddy. And I almost feel for the guy. I've read his blog posts on the topic, and he tries to be polite and makes an argument that is a sound one (guys can be feminists), though completely unnecessary (because everyone knows that already) and seems to completely miss the point as to why he isn't allowed to post on Tiger Beatdown. Which is another reason why he can't post on TB. It's a vicious circle.

So, Sady is trying to be funny (she mentions it's her livelihood) and make some points. What's not to like?

i must admit, i didn't think the mythical "SRS males" actually existed until this thread. i wonder if this is some kind of attempt to pick up women?

I picked up my wife with a show of my statistical prowess and an offer to buy coffee. Like, seven years ago. The feminism stems from having a personality to speak of.

[BigBallinStalin]

Oh, well my position is that this thread was pretty lame, serving as an echo chamber for a bunch of dudes unfamiliar with feminism. Also, Sady Doyle is hilarious and sometimes I steal her lines.

EDIT: I forgot the part about how people involved in a subject are more likely to be better contributors, but it's probably for the best since it will be reduced to a straw man about how nobody can talk about anything while criticizing me for making a straw man argument.

A succinct cop-out. Fare thee well!

You were getting a bit emotional back there, weren't you?

That has actually been my stance this whole time, along with being frustrated with people overreacting to an aggressive tone. It's not really my fault everyone was so up in arms over imagined demons about feminism.

Based TGD's and my conversation with you, that really wasn't the case... Perhaps you were imagining things?

ell me more, BBS. Would you say I was hysterical?

With our dialogue, you weren't making sense, which is odd since you hardly exhibit that behavior.



Hysterical? No... more like a mix between this cop:



And this guy:

[notyou2]

Women are nurturers, healers, comforters. They make sound decisions based on their perceptions and situational influences. They are peacemakers. They are good with money. I believe they lie less.

have you ever been married? just curious. IIRC you are older than most of us.

Yes (still am), and yes.

[thegreekdog]

Oh, well my position is that this thread was pretty lame, serving as an echo chamber for a bunch of dudes unfamiliar with feminism. Also, Sady Doyle is hilarious and sometimes I steal her lines.

EDIT: I forgot the part about how people involved in a subject are more likely to be better contributors, but it's probably for the best since it will be reduced to a straw man about how nobody can talk about anything while criticizing me for making a straw man argument.

In related news, no women have posted in this thread.

[Neoteny]

Oh, well my position is that this thread was pretty lame, serving as an echo chamber for a bunch of dudes unfamiliar with feminism. Also, Sady Doyle is hilarious and sometimes I steal her lines.

EDIT: I forgot the part about how people involved in a subject are more likely to be better contributors, but it's probably for the best since it will be reduced to a straw man about how nobody can talk about anything while criticizing me for making a straw man argument.

In related news, no women have posted in this thread.

Which I am disappointed about, and the only reason I decided I should chip in.

[Neoteny]

Kent accidentally pmed this to me, and told me it's ok for me to repost here.

Subject: Why are you a Feminist?

It is much less an issue of fun than it is an issue of time, Haggis.

I don't understand why you guys are talking about individuals here. Why are you all so terrified of the feminists? Have you all had "retaliatory" or "blackmailing" sexual harassment charges filed against you or something?

We are individuals and have individual experiences.

Sure, as do the variety of feminists that make up the movement that is doing it wrong.

Yes, I figured you enjoyed smart-assery. It doesn't bother me that you challenged my position, so much as you say my view is unnecessary and undesired. I would prefer that you just show me where I am wrong. I think I am pretty reasonable, I may be wrong though. I was posting my personal experience and that does count. Even if it is a minority, every organization has it crazies. I am fine with telling people that the feminist movement is doing it wrong and I am okay with being wrong myself. That is what discussions are for. You guys have railed at Scotty for being vague about his views. I try to be clear about my view point, so you know where I stand and can give me examples of how I am wrong. To simply say STFU, is ridiculous. If you posted some links I would look at them and they may even override the personal experiences.

Why does it bother you that you some will consider your opinions unnecessary and desired? This actually happens all the time. You are obviously an intelligent individual with probably lots of important things to contribute to a variety of topics. You already have a leg up on, say, john9blue, whose views on most, if not all, topics is unnecessary and undesired. I can't say I know your credentials, but if you popped in on a discussion of quantum physics, your input might not be necessary or desired. Or, if it is there, it may not be in circles discussing chiaroscuro technique. Particularly if you want to talk about how Vermeer was doing it wrong. To be fair, this website is not a comparable circle, but I wasn't really trying to get into... all of this. My original goal was just to note how many dudes were in here, and how happy they were to pontificate on feminism, and offer that as a one line criticism to get them to maybe consider shutting the f*ck up.

If we don't post our misconceptions, then they never get challenged and your view point doesn't change much. I hate Google for looking up controversial topics. There is a lot of crazy crap and I would rather dialogue about it. Again, the STFU mentality just closes off the chance that someones views may change. That pushes people away from the movement.

When Sady says "shut the f*ck up", she's not actually going for closing off the conversation. She's responding forcefully, and with some comedy, to the overwhelming privilege that men feel they should be allowed to be in everything, including, apparently, a place designated as a safe space for women to talk about feminism, and other things, without having to put up with the same shit they have to everywhere else. This is an issue that Americans in particular have, thinking that the right to free speech trumps everyone else's right to not have to listen to you, but it's an international problem as well. If a woman wants a man's opinion on feminism, she can go to reddit, or a news website, or outside her door. If she wants to laugh a bit and work on serious shit with other women without having to explain to a dude for the umpteenth time how "man-hating" is a phrase (and has been for decades) used to ridicule and intellectually demote the feminist movement as a whole despite the fact that it certainly does apply to some feminists, she can go to Tiger Beatdown. Again, Sady doesn't want all men to shut up about feminism. She appreciates plenty of men with feminist perspectives. She wants people like Freddy to consider his perspectives a bit more, especially because he is calling himself a feminist. There might be some "You don't agree with me" going on there, as it will go for any discussion with more than one side, but the majority of her point is to explain why the blog is a safe place, and it's exactly because of guys like Freddy. And I almost feel for the guy. I've read his blog posts on the topic, and he tries to be polite and makes an argument that is a sound one (guys can be feminists), though completely unnecessary (because everyone knows that already) and seems to completely miss the point as to why he isn't allowed to post on Tiger Beatdown. Which is another reason why he can't post on TB. It's a vicious circle.

So, Sady is trying to be funny (she mentions it's her livelihood) and make some points. What's not to like?

Understood. I think bothered may have been to strong of word though. I used it because it was the word you used.

My main point in asking you to elaborate was because I honestly wanted to know why you put me in that circle and then you tell me I get bothered by someone challenging my ideas. I wouldn't have asked if I minded being challenged.

Regarding Sady. I think the hardest part is that you need to enjoy that type of humor or be more familiar with her tone. Kind of like Kathy Griffin. I am not a fan of her humor and all I can hear is her voice when reading Sady. That is my prejudice though and I'll try to read through it a little more light heartedly.

Lastly, I do understand that I could have shared my experiences without adding comment on the whole feminist movement.

My response: that's all fair.

[Neoteny]

everyone was so up in arms over imagined demons about feminism.

Based TGD's and my conversation with you, that really wasn't the case... Perhaps you were imagining things?

ell me more, BBS. Would you say I was hysterical?

With our dialogue, you weren't making sense, which is odd since you hardly exhibit that behavior.

TGD was having a completely separate conversation, I think, and you were misrepresenting my point about how people within a particular movement are going to consider those who are obviously ignorant about the field as, well, ignorant about the field, as well as agreeing with broad generalizations about feminism. Which is something people that have issues do.

[BigBallinStalin]

everyone was so up in arms over imagined demons about feminism.

Based TGD's and my conversation with you, that really wasn't the case... Perhaps you were imagining things?

ell me more, BBS. Would you say I was hysterical?

With our dialogue, you weren't making sense, which is odd since you hardly exhibit that behavior.

TGD was having a completely separate conversation, I think, and you were misrepresenting my point about how people within a particular movement are going to consider those who are obviously ignorant about the field as, well, ignorant about the field, as well as agreeing with broad generalizations about feminism. Which is something people that have issues do.

Lol, okay. I'll learn not to take you so seriously, if that's how you defend your ever-changing position.

[thegreekdog]

everyone was so up in arms over imagined demons about feminism.

Based TGD's and my conversation with you, that really wasn't the case... Perhaps you were imagining things?

ell me more, BBS. Would you say I was hysterical?

With our dialogue, you weren't making sense, which is odd since you hardly exhibit that behavior.

TGD was having a completely separate conversation, I think, and you were misrepresenting my point about how people within a particular movement are going to consider those who are obviously ignorant about the field as, well, ignorant about the field, as well as agreeing with broad generalizations about feminism. Which is something people that have issues do.

Let me be clear (ha)... I don't care about feminism generally. The concept of feminism doesn't affect me in any positive or negative way. When feminism dictates policy and law and that policy and law negatively affecs me, I would concentrate on the policy or law and not the underlying feminist concepts. So, although no one mentioned it specifically, the equal pay act does not negatively affet me so I do not care. I lean towards caring because there could be unforeseen consequences (e.g. increased federal budgets for administering the law) that negatively affect me, but ultimately I do not care.

I suppose if my wife became some version of feminist that guided her to the point of view that I should pee sitting down (to use an absurd example), I suppose that would negatively affect me. But I can't think of anything that is not absurd that would negatively affect me.

So, I'm indifferent. Although, by my indifference I suppose that means I'm not a feminist and fall into some category of chauvinist. But I'm indifferent to that as well I suppose. I'm not offended if someone calls me ignorant about feminism. I'm ignorant about a lot of things that I'm indiffernt about.

[jonesthecurl]

Is this the point at which someone says "it depends what you mean by feminist"?

[Neoteny]

Le sigh. BBS, do you want to start over and try again? I hate when we fight. And maybe now that Kent and I seem to have resolved our discussion, Greek has made it clear that, yes, he is still a Libertarian, and I maybe chased FT away, I will have the time to clarify my position better.

[Funkyterrance]

You already have a leg up on, say, john9blue, whose views on most, if not all, topics is unnecessary and undesired.

This is really an unfair statement. I happen to appreciate john9blue's views. He is severely outnumbered and that's just a matter of the demographics of this site but implying that he's not a welcome contributor because he voices a minority group is wrong. Where do you get off exactly?

When Sady says "shut the f*ck up", she's not actually going for closing off the conversation. She's responding forcefully, and with some comedy, to the overwhelming privilege that men feel they should be allowed to be in everything, including, apparently, a place designated as a safe space for women to talk about feminism, and other things, without having to put up with the same shit they have to everywhere else. This is an issue that Americans in particular have, thinking that the right to free speech trumps everyone else's right to not have to listen to you, but it's an international problem as well. If a woman wants a man's opinion on feminism, she can go to reddit, or a news website, or outside her door. If she wants to laugh a bit and work on serious shit with other women without having to explain to a dude for the umpteenth time how "man-hating" is a phrase (and has been for decades) used to ridicule and intellectually demote the feminist movement as a whole despite the fact that it certainly does apply to some feminists, she can go to Tiger Beatdown.

So you're defending the feminist equivalent to a men's club where guys sit around playing golf, smoking cigars and telling sexist jokes? Or a construction site where the unsaid rule is "no women with equal rights allowed". These are great places for chauvinistic men to feel comfortable in their own skins. If any environment is going to encourage the "man hater" mentality, it's a place where your average uninformed man or any man who dares disagree with the general consensus, is not welcome.

Sady doesn't want all men to shut up about feminism. She appreciates plenty of men with feminist perspectives.

In other words, she's ok discussing perspectives with people who agree with her. What a breakthrough! Don't hurt yourself, Sady.

Regarding Sady. I think the hardest part is that you need to enjoy that type of humor or be more familiar with her tone.

Maybe. But you posted her quotes, therefore taking responsibility for their literal interpretation. Anyway, we are getting her/your tone just fine within your posts I think.

[thegreekdog]

Le sigh. BBS, do you want to start over and try again? I hate when we fight. And maybe now that Kent and I seem to have resolved our discussion, Greek has made it clear that, yes, he is still a Libertarian, and I maybe chased FT away, I will have the time to clarify my position better.

FUCKING-A RIGHT BUDDY!

Also, have the women of Conquer Club nominated you to speak for them? Having a man speak for them seems rather the antithesis of most feminism I'm familiar with (not that I'm familiar with much feminism... DO WHAT YOU WANT! SMOKE POT! YEAH LIBERTARIANS!).

[Funkyterrance]

And I maybe chased FT away, I will have the time to clarify my position better.

Nah, I'm still here and still not mad. It would be nice if there were some way to attach actual tone to a post.

Also, have the women of Conquer Club nominated you to speak for them? Having a man speak for them seems rather the antithesis of most feminism I'm familiar with (not that I'm familiar with much feminism.

I dunno, I think that having a man be the spokesperson might actually be effective in some ways. Just that fact perhaps implies an underlying problem but who are we kidding right?

[thegreekdog]

I'm just wondering how Neo is going to explain feminism when he's not a woman and has painted himself into a corner of "if you're not a woman you cannot understand feminism."

[Funkyterrance]

I'm just wondering how Neo is going to explain feminism when he's not a woman and has painted himself into a corner of "if you're not a woman you cannot understand feminism."

Oh yeah, that. But isn't it more like "If you're not a feminist you can't understand feminism."? I'm not sure which is a tougher stance to defend.