Sigh. I've been deleted and blocked by yet another feminist page on Facebook....

Sorry, I hadn't seen your post before I posted Malensky, v slow computer here at work.

I guess having 2 sons, a husband (not called Nigel) and 3 brothers making those statements invokes an emotional, defensive response from me.

Brilliant post (10:33), Malenky.

So does that mean that because all men are "capable" of watching violent porn that it is OK to say that they do or even that most men do?
The example I gave obviously wasn't great, but the truth is sweeping generalisations aren't helpful in any situation.
And if someone is objecting to or seeking clarification about a statement how does it help to just shut them down by deleting and blocking?

'incapable' means a different thing anyway.

No, not all men do, and that is why I posted on this thread to try to point out that the feminists on the page Annie is pissed off with never said all men did.

As for 'but some women are incapable of being funny', yes indeed. But there is no difference between men and women in this area. Whereas the watching of violent porn is almost entirely a men thing not a women thing. That is the point.

But men (as a class) look at porn. Right? We can all agree on this?

It's like when people get upset about 'all men are potential rapists'. All it means is, under UK law, rape is unconsensual penetration. All men who have penises could do it. It's the lowest common denominator that defines people who could commit rape.

Yet some people get really upset because they think what is being said is that men must and will rape. They think you've defined what a rapist is, not given the widest group of the population from which a rapist can emerge.

I don't know what the solution to the communication issue is. If we never acknowledge the class of people who are potential rapists, we're sort of talking as if it's a perpetrator-less crime. That way you end up with people who have my dad's attitude - he thinks rape is a 'woman's issue'. I find that extremely sad, really, because the result is that he has all these (frankly) horrible and disturbing ideas about what is 'real' rape, but he would never trouble to examine them because he is so convinced that rape is only an issue for women to worry about. He would never examine his own behaviour or the behaviour of men he knows, because he's convinced that he already knows men don't rape, it's only some ill-defined subsection of people he doesn't have to think about.

I think it really matters that we name the classes of people who do things, as well as the victims. I don't have any issue with people saying 'white people enslaved black people', because that has been true at various points in human history, and it has had a significant effect on the shape of the world. I don't feel the need to say 'yes, but black people enslaved other black people too, and there are trafficked women who are white, and, and ...', because I can see that someone wants to talk about a different issue from those.

Not all men wank to or look at any porn. My Nigel does not. And I would stake my children's lives on that statement.

I do see what you're saying about the grammar, tunip, and it does get on my nerves too, but I think people can be really bad about questions. I'm sure it's not just feminism. But I resent the fact that when I started posting in this section, while some people were lovely others took all questioning as attack. I get irritated by would-be innocent 'so, tell me why rape is bad' questions from trolls, and stirry questions from pests, and sometimes I can't distinguish them from innocent questions from people who just want to debate. So I don't always answer.

I do think unless you are very sure someone is trolling or on the wind up, responding to questions with silence is better.

I'm fine with statements about men as a class. But four years ago I would not have known feminism was a class-based analysis. Yes, the onus is on me to educate myself. But I don't think I deserved the kicking I got for not knowing things.

annie - on the specific point of whether focusing purely on the harm men do is productive - yes, my impression is, it's hugely productive actually. There's a page that simply posts what punters say on online chat groups about the prostitutes they visit, and it is shockingly powerful. Should they dilute that impact with a load of men going on record to say 'prostitution is wrong' or 'I think this is really creepy and abusive'? I find that kinda patronizing to men actually. No-one would bother to make these websites if it weren't meant to be shocking!

Some women are incapable of being funny though, as are some men.
Just like not all men wank to violent rape porn.

I agree completly Lizzylou, but to some on these forums any porn is violent rape porn in that that they believe it's not truly consensual.

Startail.

Yes I worked in a London bar for many years and believe me the comments re: any women who dared to wear something revealing were far worse coming from the Women then from the Men, far worse.

Some women are incapable of being funny though, as are some men.
Just like not all men wank to violent rape porn.

Lizzylou, 'women are incapable of being funny' is a false equivalence, because women are not incapable of being funny but the internet is actually bursting with violent rape porn which men wank to.

The Wipeout Misogyny page on Facebook was started by and is run by a man. A man who has admitted to using it to meet women, some of whom were made admins after sleeping with him. This blew up spectacularly and he had to ban them and admit why.

You are making perfect sense to me, Annie.

Occasions

I've been hurt, derided and put down many times in my life 90% of those ovations have been by women.

I agree with Lizzy, this wouldn't be acceptable if discussing women but ok to use it for discussing men.

So it's an opportunity for reasoned debate, unpicking why another feminist could have misinterpreted what they wrote and explaining their rationale and thread of debate more thoroughly.
But what good does blocking and deleting do?

What do you think when men do the same thing with with the word "women" though, Turnip?
If you think "Women are moody and illogical" or "Women are incapable of being funny" are ok statements (in line with your thinking below) then fair enough.
I don't like sweeping generalisations of any kind, whether it be Sex, Race or Religion.

I find this really bizarre tbh.
If I say 'children throw food' or 'oh my God, kids are so noisy' no-one thinks I am denying the existence of well-behaved quiet children.

And yet people are so determined to believe that feminists think EVERY SINGLE MAN is a bastard even when that is not what they say.

Feminism is a class-based analysis. Feminists are going to talk about things done by men as a group. And yet because they don't affix the word 'some' every time they mention men, they seem to get constantly misread.

Aah, see I would take it to mean all men tbh.

I too think women will have to work with men to change things.

I would take that to mean very significant numbers of men.
I wouldn't take it to mean 'all men' and I think it is a bit off that you said they had said all men, when they hadn't.