Feminism Thread

[hey]

Shit i didn't know, please forgive me.

[archibaldcrane]

You guys are misunderstanding (probably intentionally) how satire functions. This wasn't a case where right-handed people took offense because they didn't understand that he really wasn't a lefty activist. The feminists who took issue with the article read it correctly, understanding that it is mocking social justice activists who "see injustice everywhere they look". They correctly interpreted the point of the satire, understood that he was calling them out, and in turn criticised the publication that gave him that platform.

The fact that it is satire is irrelevant.

[hey]

Definitely intentionally.

[Melena]

Can't say i've ever seen someone complain about the word moron, and i do spend most of my time with people who call stuff like that out.

I'm sorry but i'm not going to go out of my way to change my vocabulary because some random person gets offended. If you get offended by someone calling another person a moron, i'm not going to stop calling people moron's in your presence cause it hurts your feelings.

Do you also go around calling people "faggots"? Sorry, that makes you a pretty awful person.

The fuck?

[Karbuncle]

You guys are misunderstanding (probably intentionally) how satire functions. This wasn't a case where right-handed people took offense because they didn't understand that he really wasn't a lefty activist. The feminists who took issue with the article read it correctly, understanding that it is mocking social justice activists who "see injustice everywhere they look". They correctly interpreted the point of the satire, understood that he was calling them out, and in turn criticised the publication that gave him that platform.

The fact that it is satire is irrelevant.

Okay, then lets move on to the "Nobody cares if you're offended, put on your big boy pants and move on" portion of the discussion ala page 272 or so (109, 120, whatever). To where we discuss the cons of bullying/mob tactics to effect someones life due to a difference in opinion, and why we think its stupid you people can't see how "Difference of opinion" should not equate too "Get him fired and vandalize his living quarters". You disagree with his article because it calls out a few of the crazy things some people in the movement you associate with have been known to abuse, thats fine, perhaps try and discuss it with him so maybe he sees not all feminists are like that? Perhaps open a dialogue with him in the newsletter itself, ask for an interview, anything that didn't involve just raising a mob and bullying him into a half hearted apology or getting fired, then vandalizing his room? ... NOPE, Better continue to enforce the same stereotype he wrote about! Feminist logic \o/.

So now, instead of doing something reasonable in an attempt to actively differentiate yourself from the type of near sociopathic people he wrote the article about, you've silenced someone for having a different opinion than you even if it didn't directly apply to you, fueled his distrust/dislike for your community, and got yet more bad publicity for your movement as a whole further driving those who might be on the edge about the movement, away from it. Mission accomplished?

Again using "You" not as "YOU ARCHI" but as a general "Involved party".

Obviously, not all feminists are like this, which would have been nice if he headlines read something like "Man posts satire on extremist feminism, has discussion with rational feminist, realizes there more to a movement then its worse and loudest"... but no, that'd be too rational. Personally I do enjoy reading and seeing discussions of rational feminist (who the crazy feminist actually hate: See - "The Factual Feminist")... but these people are often drowned out by the horde of "Burn the patriarchy" feminist who use the word feminist more or less as a power beacon for their own agenda. Thats the most f**ked up part for me is I can see some of the rational argument feminists can have, some of the things i go "yah, thats kinda effed up ya know?", but its drowned out by an ocean of incomprehensibly moronic people using "feminist" just to push whatever they might want at the time, or to silence someone or something that they dont agree with.

Edit: Soooooo many Edits.... so... so many edits.

[hey]

If you think this article describes the worst of feminism, then you are a big part of the problem feminism aims to solve.

[Karbuncle]

If you think this article describes the worst of feminism, then you are a big part of the problem feminism aims to solve.

I'd be more concerned if feminism had solved anything yet. Still, what problem, exactly, do you see here that needs to be solved?

Edit: And I want to clarify, Are you're implying that taking any sort of reasonable action like, logically talking to this man to "Solve" the problem (that I'm apparently a part of) is the bad idea here, and that getting him fired and harassing him was the better option? Cause I'm quite confused on this point in your response. Do you honestly feel that this "problem" could not have been "solved" by any other means than harassing him and getting him fired by bullying his boss until the good PR thing to do was to can him?

To quote one of my favorite movies, "I feel like I'm taking crazy pills".

[NynJa]

If you think this article describes the worst of feminism, then you are a big part of the problem feminism aims to solve.

Please, enlighten me, I'm a boneheaded cisgender white middle class Canadian male, my privilege card is Platinum certified, and for that very reason, I have no fucking clue what feminism is aiming to solve these days. It used to be "gender equality", and it got that, so now it wants more, a lot more.

[BaneTheBrawler]

i hate you guys sometimes. like now.

Bane, cmon man, you have to fucking step in on this. As a mod whos job is to clean this area up, theres no fucking way in hell you can allow someone to say "Not answering that, lolstrawman", then do what hey just did. I dont give a shit if hey is a fully oppressed transgender introvert and I'm a fully priviledged white heterosexual canadian male, that has nothing to do with discussing the topic at hand.

Poor/hypocritical arguments aren't against the rules, sorry.

This would be like if I screamed to Bane that Hey's posts are offensive to me, she needs to be banned, and he digs up a loophole that says you can't post in a feminism thread if you watch Johnny Bravo every day, even though Nynja watches it every day as well and isn't banned from posting in it.

Shitposting is against the rules, though, and what constitutes shitposting is open to my interpretation. That's pretty loopholey.

I'm not going to take action against anyone at this point because you've all done remarkably well about being civil. The problems this thread has are not something I can fix without ending the discussion, and I think the discussion has value. For now. Please try to keep it that way.

[Priran]

Everyone wants to act like they are taking part in discourse, that they are fair salesmen in the marketplace of ideas. You want to make yourself out to be reasonable, rather than revealing that you are a bunch of close-minded, insular lunatics whose only interest in getting into the market of ideas is so you can shout people down and unload a canned speech on them.

The problem is, that many of the sellers in the market place of ideas are exactly that. Snake oil merchants who have lied their way in to the market itself under false pretenses.

And that is the greatest, most glaring hypocrisy of modern Feminism, and the same tendencies is on steroids for the online version: Feminists enter into spaces, intrude on them, claiming that they are there to right injustice, or raise consciousness. They are just there to talk. And what follows are blocking and shaming tactics, having people’s social media accounts suspended, people fired from their jobs, if possible, claims of abuse and harassment all directed towards one aim and only one aim: To have a monologue, to engage in the marketplace of ideas by shutting everyone else up, through harassment and proxy violence if necessary so they can run a re-education camp for a captive audience.

That, to me, is the greatest hypocrisy of modern Feminism: It enters into spaces paying lip service to the idea of having a discussion, of having a dialogue, or being able to be persuaded by facts and common sense when, in fact, it’s just another totalizing system, another big bag of predetermined ideological nonsense, as much as any other crackpot theory or religious dogma, that can only operate in the a complete vacuum of dissenting voices and is more than willing to suck the air out of any room to accomplish this.

(source)

[Melena]

If you think this article describes the worst of feminism, then you are a big part of the problem feminism aims to solve.

Actually I'd say you are the worst of feminism. Here's a tip, people should be treated based on how they act, not what equipment they have. If you act like a cunt bag, I'll treat you like a cunt bag, regardless if you have tits, cock, both, none, etc. etc. Silencing a satire post because you don't like what was in it is fucking retarded, no matter how you spin it.

[hey]

I'd be more concerned if feminism had solved anything yet.

lol

Edit: And I want to clarify, Are you're implying that taking any sort of reasonable action like, logically talking to this man to "Solve" the problem (that I'm apparently a part of) is the bad idea here, and that getting him fired and harassing him was the better option? Cause I'm quite confused on this point in your response. Do you honestly feel that this "problem" could not have been "solved" by any other means than harassing him and getting him fired by bullying his boss until the good PR thing to do was to can him?

No, that is not at all what i said. I'm not sure where you got that from.

Actually I'd say you are the worst of feminism. Here's a tip, people should be treated based on how they act, not what equipment they have.

When did i say otherwise?

Silencing a satire post because you don't like what was in it is fucking retarded, no matter how you spin it.

I feel like there's some joke i'm missing, where being satire is relevant at all to this.

[Melena]

All the time with your, oh don't say *insert thing here* you may offend someone, oh don't walk too close to a girl late at night, you may scare her, blah blah blah till the end of time. And Satire is relevant as the whole fucking article that was written that someone decided to squeeze out the entire sahara desert from her vagina was satire.

[archibaldcrane]

You don't understand how satire works, Melena.

[Xantavia]

Not trying to derail this thread. Just stay with me in a little game of word replacement.

An article is written / a movie is made.

Feminist gets offended / world leader gets offended

Demands an apology or you lose your job / demands movie not shown or sensitive information leaked and violence occurs.

Congratulations hey, you side with Kim Jong Un.

If you want people to change, engage them in a civil discussion. Telling them your feelings are hurt and trying to shut them down helps nothing. If anything, they will dig in their heels and purposely do it again. If you truly and honestly think they did something wrong and offensive, start a dialogue. Explain to them what they did wrong and get them thinking critically.

Unrelated, but have an avatar so you don't have to keep correction he/she usage.

Spoiler: show

apologies for the question mark. what I found with quick google search

[Priran]

So after you've been the subject of satire and gotten the satirist fired for speaking against you, is it average everyday doublethink to then keep claiming you're oppressed or has that crossed into advanced doublethink?

[Priran]

Are feminists just jealous that somebody satirized them better than they satirize themselves?

Powerful gods and demi-gods impregnating human women—it’s a common theme in the history of religion, and it’s more than a little rapey.

...

This omission is more than regrettable, it is tragic. Two thousand years after Hebrew and Aramaic texts were assembled into the modern Jewish Bible, 1600 years after a Roman Catholic committee voted books in and out of the Christian Bible, 1400 years after Muhammad wrote the Koran (which draws heavily on the moral framework of the Judeo-Christian tradition), we still struggle with the question of female consent.

...

One can’t help but notice that a large number of high profile cases involve high status males: fraternity members, a famous actor, a radio host, small town football stars and big league professional athletes—men, in other words, who think they are gods. Convinced of their own deific qualities, it just follows that the object of their attentions has gotta want it—and if she doesn’t, well, that fine too, because when a god wants a woman, consent isn’t really part of the story.

[hey]

Demands an apology or you lose your job / demands movie not shown or sensitive information leaked and violence occurs.

That is one hell of a replacement.

[wipers]

To summarize:

http://www.theconservative.co.nz/sit...rrightsend.jpg

[hey]

To summarize:

http://www.theconservative.co.nz/sit...rrightsend.jpg

Yeah, it sure seems like that. cishet men always getting mad other people call them out for their bullshit. We should stop oppressing the poor white men and hurting their feelings.