Why are feminists so aggressive?

BertrandRussell

TheSparrowhawk does it here

But some things are fundamental to feminism, in that if you don't believe them then you're not a feminist

brazen
I hope you don't stop posting on the feminist board, because I want to hear what you have to say.
It's very important to hear both sides of a debate.
I will not belittle you or judge you.

The feminist boards haven't chosen anything, they're boards. They are however, used by feminists who have feminist opinions. If you don't agree with feminism then you're probably not a feminist, that seems pretty obvious. Would you go on the religion board and say 'I'm a Christian but I don't believe in Jesus' and expect anybody to agree with you?? Saying you have a certain set of beliefs implies that you believe those things. If you don't believe them then you don't believe them, that's fine but claiming that you are still part of that group despite not believing (when belief is the defining factor) is odd.

We are talking about Sparrowhawk's deeply infantiling statement that stated that MarthaMcMartha wasn't a feminist when nothing in her post suggested anything but an abiding commitment to feminism.

I'll be happy to address your point when you have addressed mine.

BertrandRussell

Bertand, Sparrowhawk did it on page 3 with MarthaMcMartha. Literally on this thread, in front of your eyes.

Now, whilst realising it was only a novel, surely you can see the correlation between language and control.

Well exactly, which is why it would be both polite and accurate to say 'firefighter' rather than 'fireman'

But some things are fundamental to feminism, in that if you don't believe them then you're not a feminist

This 100%.

If feminism is how it's presented on the feminism boards. I am absolutely not a feminist.

But this means I am not welcome on the feminism boards.

Which means no dissenting opinion is welcome on the feminism boards?

Therein lies the problem with the way the feminism boards has chosen to go

*There are people on this board that don't realise the damage they are doing to the feminist movement. They are incapable of discussing an issue without resorting to personal insults, aimed at other women as well as men. If you don't share their view then - in their opinion - you can't be a feminist. And apparently it's only their opinion that counts.

I hope the more aggressive posters take this on board as constructive feedback, and understand that their current behaviour does far more harm than it does good.*

Too right.
Personally, I enjoy the discussion, but you have to be very thick skinned to come on here and even dare to have a view that isn't staunchly radical feminist.

"As far as can see it's mostly one section of the population railing about how another section of the population telling you how to think dress speak etc.... whilst doing the exact same thing themselves."
Which is why this occurs repeatedly as an attempted derail, cos it misses the point of the whole thing entirely.
It's the difference between thinking feminism is all about letting women have as many free choices as possible, and instead asking why women's choices are different to mens and why they are different in the way they are.......

As regards history, at one time insisting on calling it herstory emphasized the fact that so often history wasn't about women/girls. So, I always write my exams papers in an STEM subject using she for a student, because as long as it still causes surprise (and as long as the proportion of females in the lecture seats in front of me remains so low), then the point still needs to be made.

I've never understood quite why it is so acceptable to come out with the 'nasty mean feminists put me off feminism' (sorry, is it a club you don't want to join, or a way of understanding the current structure of society?) line, whereas the 'nasty mean men put me right off men' line is instead always swiftly countered with the NAMALT knee-jerk. Except of course, the nastiness of men being referred to (sexual and other violence for starters) is a teeny bit more serious than the 'nastiness' of feminists that puts people off.

Perhaps this means something????? I dunno, I'm just an old-style man-hating, dungaree wearing radical feminist lesbian .....although finding dungarees aren't as easy as it used to be and my 80s-issue feminist uniform wore out :-)

'Because a movement can have done fantastic stuff in the past but have lost its way now.'

Yes that is a possible thing. However I don't feel that's the case with feminism, given that the aim of it has not changed at all.

Yes of course I can see the correlation between language and control formerly. Language has been used for centuries to control women and to belittle them - 'girl' as an insult being a prime example. Tipping the balance the other way in a very small fashion serves to right that situation somewhat.

'That's part of the problem isn't it though. When theres only one way to be a feminist or hold feminist view, there doesn't leave much room for debate. Only people getting together and congratulating each other on their excellent feminist views.

Personally I think there are a lot of difference ways to promote female interests'

I see what you're saying, and in some ways I agree - there are some things that are definitely up for debate. But some things are fundamental to feminism, in that if you don't believe them then you're not a feminist - it's not the case that feminism covers absolutely everything a woman can possibly do IYSWIM.

It genuinely baffles me how women can look at the movement that gave them everything they have and say 'nah, I don't agree with it.'

Because a movement can have done fantastic stuff in the past but have lost its way now.

In answer to your second part, I find it surprising that in 2017 educated people have to be told not to use sex-specific words. I think if they had to do it, they had to do it, but really they shouldn't have had to do it.

I'm sure you are familiar with the novel "1984", and the concept of "Newspeak".

Now, whilst realising it was only a novel, surely you can see the correlation between language and control.

When the suffragettes were fighting for women to get the vote, many women didn't agree with them - they called them aggressive, said they were harming women, destroying society etc. It's a pretty standard response tbh. If feminists changed tack every time someone said 'you're not nice enough' women would have literally nothing.

So if you come on a feminist board and disagree with feminist ideas people are going to respond strongly

That's part of the problem isn't it though. When theres only one way to be a feminist or hold feminist view, there doesn't leave much room for debate. Only people getting together and congratulating each other on their excellent feminist views.

Personally I think there are a lot of difference ways to promote female interests.

There are people on this board that don't realise the damage they are doing to the feminist movement. They are incapable of discussing an issue without resorting to personal insults, aimed at other women as well as men. If you don't share their view then - in their opinion - you can't be a feminist. And apparently it's only their opinion that counts.

I hope the more aggressive posters take this on board as constructive feedback, and understand that their current behaviour does far more harm than it does good.

Yes I agree the tone is infantilising Brazen and it's not a good look. But it is frustrating to hear women say 'I don't agree with feminism' when, without feminism, they would have no right to vote, no right to own property, no right to have custody of their own children, no right to education, no right to work in many fields, no right to bodily autonomy, no right not to be raped in marriage, no right to stand for election, pretty much no rights at all. It genuinely baffles me how women can look at the movement that gave them everything they have and say 'nah, I don't agree with it.'

TheSparrowhawk

MarthaMcMartha literally says she's a feminist; That she believes in feminism; States she has actively challenged stereotypes and raised sons to be feminist; But because she thinks that your approach is hostile and aggressive, you condescend to her, misrepresent her position and count her as separate from the movement.

I can't imagine where these hostile impressions come from.

@Toffeelatteplease

Totally agree with this -
As far as can see it's mostly one section of the population railing about how another section of the population telling you how to think dress speak etc.... whilst doing the exact same thing themselves.

So, please tell us how you feel about banning certain words because they are perceived as "sexist".

Well, pretty much the same way as I feel about banning words that are racist - ie. probably, on the whole, a good thing.

Personally I can't see the problem with saying 'firefighter' instead of 'fireman' since there are a fair few women who are firefighters. etc.

Turned me right off feminism.

Gracious. OK, fair enough, does that mean that it's OK for me to be 'turned right off men' given the sexist abuse I've received online (and for pretty innocuous stuff like having an opinion on a type of car for example) - or would that be an example of 'vitriol against men' or man-hating?

While I don't think it should get personal toffee, if you disagree with feminism then you're not going to get on very well with it are you? So if you come on a feminist board and disagree with feminist ideas people are going to respond strongly. I don't think it should become nasty, but people will defend their views quite strongly.