'Man-hating feminism'

What an excellent quote beachcomber

Thank you proley - glad it makes sense.

I don't mean to put the boot in, but I also think that a privileged person who thinks they should be treated the same as a nonprivileged person, in a space dedicated to the issues and voices of the nonprivileged, is acting really, well - privileged.

I also think the person is exhibiting obliviousness to their privilege.

Handy word 'privilege' isn't it?

I think it does matter Oppenheim. I think the same applies in the context of white supremacy.

A white person could make the same argument as a black person but it will not necessarily be received in the same way by a group of black people.

The white person has not experienced, and never will, experience the issues in the way that a black person has. Sometimes what feels like agreement to the privileged person, comes across as insulting to the non privileged person. Sometimes it comes across as trying to explain our oppression to us. Sometimes it comes across as a defence for privilege. Even when the privileged person means well.

I'm probably not explaining this very well, it isn't easy to put words on.

Oppenheim, I often link to this blog when the subject of men in feminist spaces comes up

The post in question is long so I'm going to quote the most relevant bit (although it is pretty long too!);

"As a guy who spends a great deal of time reading about, commenting on, and posting about feminist issues, I try to be really aware of what it means to have Male Privilege. I firmly believe that our culture- the very way that our society is structured- is harmful to women, and, as someone who strongly values fairness, I think that we have an obligation to work to end that. And while I also think that patriarchical systems hurt men, too, there's also the reality that part of fighting against sexism and part of being a feminist is the recognition that ending these oppressive structures means giving up unearned privileges.

And that's hard.

It's not always easy to step back and examine why I'm reacting the way I am. It's not easy to have someone accuse me of exhibiting male privilege- there are times when I want to say "But I'm on your side!" I want to do the right thing, and being told that I'm missing doesn't feel good, and it can make me feel defensive. I work to get past that and to examine my feelings and thoughts, and I often find that the other person is right. I think that I come out ahead for it, but it's not always easy or fun to discover some element of privilege that you weren't aware you had.

And the reality is that there are times when I don't think I'm wrong, and that can actually be worse.

It's not something that I talk about, and I've thought about talking about a number of times in the past, and I've always backed off, because... well, it's not a fun conversation, but if I'm going to be open and honest about my experiences as a man on feminist spaces, I think it's important to talk about it. Particularly if I want to make it clear to other men what they're in for and what they should expect.

There are times when I read a post or a comment on feminist blogs, and I simply can't participate in the conversation. It could be that I recognize that there's nothing I can add to the conversation, or it could be that the conversation is about a topic where my experiences as a man mean that I can't contribute in a meaningful way, but sometimes it's because I know that no matter what I say, it's going to create hostility, because sometimes the comments are coming from a place of deep frustration and hurt as a result of life experiences that I can only imagine.

So, yes, there are times when I simply have to shut up. Is that fair?

I don't know. Maybe it's not. Maybe I ought to be able to freely express my thoughts without fear of being unjustly attacked. Maybe I should be able to respectfully disagree with someone and expect to be treated with the same respect. Maybe.

But, honestly, I don't think so.

I think that it's my obligation as a male on a feminist space to recognize that one of the privileges that many men enjoy is the ability to have their voice respected over that of a woman. Another aspect that I try to keep in mind, and that I think is important is that many women are used to having their voices silenced, and that sometimes their anger and resentment is coming from a place that I'll never have to experience.

One of the ways that men can help deconstruct patriarchical systems is by having empathy for women's experiences, and by recognizing that sometimes it's important to shut up on women's spaces. In a world that consistently devalues the experiences of women, it's not so much to ask that women have a place where they're free to vent their frustrations."

I haven't had time to read the whole thread but I really don't understand how Purves came to that conclusion about Lionel Shriver's book. I don't think she's read it, I think she's read ABOUT it and perhaps flicked through.

I also don't know anybody who hates men, feminists included. I do know a few people who hate women though, and sadly there are quite a lot of women in their number.

Misandry (I hope that's the correct spelling) makes me very uncomfortable. However in my experience it is women who are anxious to point out they are not feminsts who wear t shirts with "men are stupid, throw rocks at them" on the front or who disparage all men.

Beachcomber,

I can see how you might be sympathetic to a woman arguing a particular point, but it really shouldn't matter if it's a man or a woman arguing the exact same point.

vesuvia,

I agree, it's only one anecdote, I'm not planning on publishing this in a journal paper. It was only my perception from a few threads I'd participated in, and doesn't constitute a wide study.

I can see why women would be suspicious of men, it makes sense.

JoanofArgus,

I never pretended to be a woman!

Also, there are viewpoints that are not at all the same depending on the person who expresses them and that person's perspective and status.

A woman saying certain things about women's issues will not be 'read' by other women in the same way a man will be. I would be more likely to listen to a woman I didn't necessarily agree with, on many issues, because I know that she is tackling the subject from a female perspective and thereby the perspective of someone who does not have male privilege and who experiences woman's lower status.

Seems bleedin' obvious really.

Oppenheim wrote - "When I've joined discussions where I've not given my gender (and therefore I think it was assumed I was a woman), and expressed similar views, the ire directed towards me disappeared. It was an interesting test."

Lots of variables to consider in your experiment.

When you did not declare your sex, what evidence do you have (rather than your assumption) that other posters assumed you to be female?

Posters have no evidence that you are male or that you are a regular who has name-changed, other than you saying that.

Women who have concealed their femaleness to e.g. apply for jobs or to have work published etc, have noticed for centuries that they are treated differently (e.g. George Eliot). Hence feminism.

I respond to people on the basis of their attitudes to feminism, women and myself. I don't care if they are male, female or intersex.

Perhaps if you're the sort of chap who prowls around feminist boards all cloak and dagger pretending to be a woman, you're the sort of chap who might annoy people anyway? Who'd'you think you are, Henry V?

Oppenheim, as Prolesworth says, I think if you think hard enough about that one you will probably be able to figure out why that may be.

I for one was perfectly welcoming and respectful to a man on here only for him to patronise the crap out of me, talk down to me and boss me around on a thread about pornography. I even defended him on one thread about how welcome men were in the feminist section. That sure came back to bite me on the arse.

Feminist discussion spaces are often suspicious of men (if they even tolerate their presence that is) for a reason.

We have also had a male poster behave with appalling crassness and male privilege on a thread about childbirth in which women were sharing birth trauma stories.

One of the problems with men participating in feminist discussions is that it is very very difficult for a person of privilege to not act privileged. I blame the patriarchy myself.

celadon,

You're right, it's just an observation on my part. It was just my observation that I could make the same points on various threads, if I identified myself as a man, I could be told that I was displaying male entitlement, etc, but if I implied I was a woman, I could argue my points, and we could have a decent discussion.

Prolesworth,

I suppose there's a fine line between being anti-patriarchy, and anti-men, and I think it's very easy to stroll close to that line on occasion.

I'd like to make an admission, but there definitely is what could be described as some level of man-suspicion (not sure I'd call it hatred).

I'm a man and I've name changed but I've posted on the feminism board before. When I've been clear that I've been a man, I've had a lot of anger directed at me. When I've joined discussions where I've not given my gender (and therefore I think it was assumed I was a woman), and expressed similar views, the ire directed towards me disappeared. It was an interesting test.

''There are numerous MRA sites listing, on some occasions entire chapters, of quotes from the works of McKinnon/Dworkin/French. Those three managed to set feminism back to the intellectual stoneage; it will take feminism generations to rid itself of the vulnerability caused by those three alone. Simply those three simply thought that feminists would read their work, without thinking for one second that they could have perhaps expressed their theories in a somewhat more subtle form.''

By that you mean presenting it in a more gentle and feminine way so that they don't offend the precious sensibilities of our great masculine overlords?

Bollocks to that. We don't need to apologise for McKinnon et al, we need to get behind what they said. Men have been acting against us for millennia. They have kept us subordinated, they have kept us powerless, they have kept us poor, they have kept us sexually exploited. The McKinnons and Dworkins are merely pointing that out and for their trouble they have been demonised, they have had their names dragged through the mud - by men and unfortunately by women too. It is you and those like you who are setting feminism back, by joining with the men behind the backlash, by denying that we (women) have a right to be angry and to be harsh in our criticism of what men have done to us.

I wish his name wasn't so similar to mine. Without my lens in I thought I had been posting dangerous claptrap in my sleep .

Isn't it always the way, though, that sexist mundanes can't get their heads round the concept that women are not all the same. What one woman says, does and thinks isn't necessarily what every woman says, does and thinks. Feminists, for instance, do not all agree with each other about everything. Feminists can have huge arguments about particular issues (is it wrong to be a SAHM/like porn/vote Tory) yet, no matter how much they disagree on certain issues, they will agree entirely on others (women are human not 'other', domestic violence is unacceptable, access to contraception/abortion essenstial).
So reading some quotes, in or out of context, by other feminists that I don't agree with isn't somehow enough to frighten me away from feminism andsend me scuttling back to don a pinny and fall at some man's feet begging for forgiveness.