Why are feminists so aggressive?

Oh for heaven's sake staunch is applied only to Scots or Northern Irish. Is anyone seriously suggesting that Nigel Farage is staunch in his politics? He's obviously a right wing politician who flirts openly with the far right. He's not staunch though.

Staunch is synonymous with religion and politics. Ian Paisley is one that comes to mind. Arlene Foster is another.

Lass is on these boards contributing to prostitution/sex work and porn in a way that is very positive for feminism.

Yes I asked you about being a feminist. I also said anyone can post here but response from feminists will be from a feminist point of view. At no point did I say you have no business posting here.

The bit where you "failed" to understand why simply being a woman means I have an interest in what is being discussed.

You know perfectly well what I'm referring to. All that querying about not being a feminist. The feminist boards being for feminists. It is not the first time you have done it.

Could you quote me where I said on this thread that you had no business posting Lass?

Actually staunch is usually used with people in the Orange Order, DUP hence why I find it an aggressive term

"Staunch" is used both pejoratively and in commendably for all sorts of political and religious beliefs, supporters of sports teams and the like.

Socialists and Communists are frequently staunch. In the dim and distant past I've described myself as a staunch Labour supporter.

^Raymond Daniel | Bristol Post
www.bristolpost.co.uk › story
24 Jun 2014 - AMUCH-loved gentleman, soldier and staunch socialist has died, aged 86^

I find it odd that a certain group of posters are seen as being gatekeepers of some sort on the feminism board - I think by many I'm seen as being part of that group

You have on several occasions told me I have business posting here- including this thread.

Sparrowhawk yes that's exactly how it seemed to me years ago when I first discovered FWR, a bit impenetrable and, I must admit, a bit ott in terms of how oppressed we are/the threat from men. Not aggressive though. Having lurked ever since, I agree with the majority here though still feel (not in a bad way) that I don't have much to contribute.

I read far more than I post on here, and have never felt excluded or that the forum has a clique.

I also agree that feminists seem to be held to higher standards than others are. Presumably because they see injustice and call it out, they are already seen as 'angry'. And from then on, it's confirmation bias. Posts pointing out injustice and inconsistency are seen as more aggressive than posts doing similar on other parts of the site, because feminists have already admitted they are angry about the state of the world.

I also think that most of us feel that we were gaslighted by the world for a long time -everything is fair really, anything that seems unequal is just the result of biological differences, you need to take responsibility for keeping yourself safe in a world where there are violent men who can't be taught not to be violent by a less gendered upbringing. I think when you suddenly see the light, you feel very protective about the new information you hold and your new world view. Especially when the world keeps trying to make you doubt it.

I think if you're a feminist that's read and debated things quite a lot then it's likely that much of your thinking comes from a very solid foundation of ideas that don't change much. So with every new situation you just evaluate the facts against that foundation and come up with a viewpoint, which many feminists who have also read and debated a lot will also come up with. I think if you're less familiar with feminism as a body of thought then that process can appear a bit baffling and inaccessible. In my case, I don't evaluate each and every issue from square one - I have a stable set of values that I measure everything against and each thing either 'passes' or doesn't.

These aren't ideas that we've just dreamed up, they've been discussed, tested, argued over and refined over many many years. If you're not familiar with them I think it can seem that everyone is just randomly agreeing.

I think this is probably right.

^ I can't keep up with all the name changes. I find that sad in a way. I don't think I'm in any inner sanctum because I'm not a rad fem and often take a pernicity critical line but I don't feel excluded either.

I find it odd that a certain group of posters are seen as being gatekeepers of some sort on the feminism board - I think by many I'm seen as being part of that group. And yet I can't name anybody else in the group - I never remember user names and I don't know who anybody is. This group is then seen as somehow controlling the whole place. What's actually happening, usually, is that we agree on a coherent argument that has been refined over the last 50 years, often by exceptional women such as Andrea Dworkin. These aren't ideas that we've just dreamed up, they've been discussed, tested, argued over and refined over many many years. If you're not familiar with them I think it can seem that everyone is just randomly agreeing.

Horrid

I honestly don't understand how you could pick on one
interpretation of a post which was clearly not meant to be serious (whether you think it was bad taste or not is a different matter, it evidently was not serious), extrapolate that from the hundreds of other threads on here for women, by women and about women, and decide that feminism here holds no interest and is a waste of your time.

Snort (not ironic).

Nope, not going to do that either sorry. I'm just going to post normally and if people have an issue with what I say they can ask me about it. Telling others how to post comes across as a bit odd to me (just an opinion [opinion face])

I've responded to your opinion on that to say that I'm not going to censor what I say

Didn't say you had to censor anything just add a to show you are joking / being ironic.

god im shit at flouncing, properly going now

Oh right, you're talking about the opinion that what was said could be misinterpreted. Yes, it could. Anything could be misinterpreted.

I've responded to your opinion on that to say that I'm not going to censor what I say and that you're quite welcome to post here in whatever way you like.

I don't see what else can be said on the matter.

If I had a health thread, and someone came along and said aloe Vera could solve my problem, I'd ask where that info had come from. Complaining about "citation please" is just another example of feminists being held more accountable for the same actions.

I will happily discuss any robustly defended point. I will not entertain random unsubstantiated assertions - that's a total waste of my time

Final post and then I really am done.

I've regularly said that this is my opinion, my opinion is not fact. I basically said this.

"I think some posts aren't all that clear on fwr. And none regulars can misinterpret this.
Here are two examples from one thread"

well that was clearly a joke

"Was it? It wasn't a jokey thread and on virtually every other thread on mn people use to indicate when they are joking"

That's it. I'm not saying my opinion is fact. It's an opinion and I have one example of an unpleasant joke.

Like I said I could research fwr threads and link to other similar posts. Maybe I would find them maybe not. But like I said I don't have time (or the interest).

The absolute irony on this is that a few times I've been told by fwr regulars that people often us humour to hide misogyny. "Oh it was just a joke, you shouldn't be so sensitive"
Now I'm sure huge numbers of people would read that post and not find it problematic at all. I'm just saying maybe some do and it wouldn't hurt to be a little clearer.

Oh, I thought Horrid was talking about feminists using evidence to back up their arguments, not asking other people to do that.

But yes, of course, it's essential.

I don't know any debate that doesn't use evidence?

Anyone can have an opinion, but as soon as that opinion is questioned, you have to back it up. You can't just say because I think so. Well you can, but it would have to be on something entirely subjective. Like your favourite colour.

When you feel like you have been through a war and are still battling for your freedoms you often will end up with a very black sense of humour or become a bit abrupt. That's fine with me.

I keep having random men on social media expecting me to bend over backwards to be nice to them to prove feminists aren't a bunch of witches. I'm tired of it. It's a shame we get it here too, would be nice just to discuss something robustly without constantly having threads derailed because feminists are meanies.

Feminists and this board is held to a higher standard than anything else on Mumsnet it's true.

Agreed Datun, and even when feminists do have research and evidence and proof there will still be people suggesting, implying, obliquely referencing the idea that it's not accurate (they'll rarely state it outright as they can't back that up). It's so fucking annoying.