Why are feminists so aggressive?

Bertrand, thanks for the reply. Some of the posts on that thread do indeed strike me as mocking damaging stereotypes. Others show an open contempt for men that is surely damaging for all.

If there was a 'Dadsnet' and a similar thread appeared about men changing to women and suddenly having the urge to nag, or obsess about their bum size or whatever, it would rightly be condemned as horribly misogynistic, no matter how 'light-hearted' the intention.

In a way I think it is unfortunate that it appeared on the Feminism board as I don't believe a lot of the posters thereon are regulars here. But nonetheless I think if anyone's teenage son read it ( by some strange chance) they would immediately think feminism's main aim was to mock them simply for their gender.

Datun

Trans-activists claim that their ideology is threatened by people questioning it or proposing counterarguments; Indeed, they feel that their very identities are threatened. As feminists on here have suggested, it may be possible that people react defensively to feminist statements because their 'status-quo' is ideologically threatened.

This isn't uncommon among people who put their ideologies at the centre of themselves, or simply believe strongly enough in their moral position.

As you say, many other groups of people react emotionally when they feel their ideology is threatened.

Is this directed at feminism? I can't speak for anyone else, but it's impossible to threaten feminism, as far as I'm concerned.

One can disagree with it, and one can threaten women. But as a concept, to me, it's impossible to threaten.

There are also posts Twibble where men are praised to the hilt if they 'babysit' their children, put out the rubbish, know where the towels are kept. Ask for help when buying a bra for their child. Make the dinner.

All praise these wonderful men eh? Such keepers!

Bertrand

I have not made any statements about what is acceptable. I have only posted to answer the question: "why are feminists so aggressive?"

As you say, many other groups of people react emotionally when they feel their ideology is threatened.

BertrandRussell

I have no desire to 'tone police'. I was simply pointing out that you made a response based on sarcastic contempt, which may be why some people feel this board, or individuals on it, behave in an aggressive and hostile manner.

Indeed, I think the feminists on this thread have answered the question in the OP - you (collectively, the FWR community) do act in a hostile, angry and aggressive fashion and you feel justified in doing so because opposition to your ideology is emotionally distressing and morally wrong.

I think this board has a lack of self-awareness. For instance, the 'OK I'm a man now, join me?' thread is a huge pile-on of women mocking men, ridiculing masculinity and belittling their partners. But then when someone mentions the man-hating aspect of your philosophy you act bemused as though such a thing appalls you.

I mean, hate men all you want, it's your board, but please don't try and pretend your bigotry isn't real.

I think there was a discussion re handmaidens some time back?

The idea of patriarchal bargaining might help here.

www.jstor.org/stable/190357?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

You think women over 50 are represented fairly and equally with men over 50

I find watching these older male actors in action movies anxiety raising. Bruce Willis goes to leap over the hood of a car and I'm hoping he doesn't blow out his knee. At our age that kind of thing doesn't heal so quickly.

Haven't read the recent posts yet.

I think people just like arguing with feminists. It's so rare anywhere to just get a feminist discussion without it going wildly off track.

It's just like Im religious but some atheists seem determined to argue with me despite my not wanting to.

We have been given a bad press now some people see it as their life's work to argue with the feminists.

You think women over 50 are represented fairly and equally with men over 50?

I didn't say that. So far as your examples of media articles about "cougars" - don't know - I don't go looking for such publications.

Still does not merit the hyperbolic nonsense Greer came out with. What debating point was she trying to make? Whatever it might have been has sunk like a stone.

Oh come off it lass
All that media articles about "cougars" for one. The fact women over 50 are largely invisible from film and TV with a few notable exceptions.

You think women over 50 are represented fairly and equally with men over 50?

but the point is that's what people say about older women

And who are these people?

Here is a random selection of women who are famous and have at some point been 56

Helen Mirren
Judi Dench
Joanna Lumley
Chrissie Hynde
Joan Bakewell
Helena Kennedy
Helena Bonham Carter
Hilary Mantel
Deborah Harry
Sarah Ferguson
Have "people" said similar about them?

I am not denying some people say sexist things - but that does not justify this level of hyperbole.

No. I'm saying it's fine for anyone to be argumentative, get heated and be sarcastic, just stop pretending you don't do it

Oh good. Because there is a lot of that happening on this thread, along with comments that could be construed as aggressive and they seem to be being made by those who are challenging feminism as much as I can make sense of some of the .

Ah well. I think Germaine is very clever at saying shocking things to try to provoke thought, I think that's what she was doing here. Yes it is a disgusting thing to say, but the point is that's what people say about older women every day. She's trying to shock people into thinking about that.

Given what people said about Diana when she was alive, I don't think what Germaine anticipated they might say now was too much of a stretch.

But I'm one of those Greer fans so....

but it's interesting to think would we still like her if she was 56? And I think we probably wouldn't, we didn't even like the Queen when she was 56. We don't like middle-aged women very much. How would Diana have middle-aged?....what would the tally be of the men who had dumped her by that stage? It would be 40 or 50 probably. Worst f**k in the country, by all accounts

Even in context it is a pretty awful thing to say. The country doesn't much like Diana's former sister-in- law for her propensity for free-loading and general pointlessness but there is nothing like that level of contempt.

As for not liking the Queen when she was 56- that would have been in 1982 - 5 years after the silver jubilee.

I'm not sure who this "we" is of whom she speaks. In my lifetime the country has divided into the group who think the monarchy is wonderful and the group who think it is a waste of tax payer's money- nothing to do with liking or disliking a middle aged woman.

I didn't hear the debate. She could have made a valid point that the country may well have lost interest in Diana, who knows, but the hyperbole of 40 or 50 men (a new man less than every 6 months?) makes her sound ridiculous.

Uh not got to the end of the thread yet but Greer didn't say Diana was the worst fuck in the country. She said
but it's interesting to think would we still like her if she was 56? And I think we probably wouldn't, we didn't even like the Queen when she was 56. We don't like middle-aged women very much. How would Diana have middle-aged?....what would the tally be of the men who had dumped her by that stage? It would be 40 or 50 probably. Worst f**k in the country, by all accounts.

I think she was saying that society doesn't value women over 50 and doesn't value women who have had "too many" sexual partners (certainly if its an older woman being open about her sex life) so our views on Diana today if she was still alive would be different.

The mirror then used a section of what she said out of context as a headline and people cba to read beyond the headline before they get offended.

If Germaine Greer was a man we would cut her a lot more slack for being misreported.
Anyway off to finish the thread