Why are feminists so aggressive?

I'm finding it difficult to understand your point scary sorry. I've never met a feminist who argues that women had it worse than all men - that would be an entirely pointless argument and not what feminism is about at all. It's not a contest about who has it worse.

The biggest thing that secures equality is economic and political stability, fair distribution of resources, and legal protection. Ie the structures that are attacked as being 'the patriarchy' and its really frustrating when modern feminists talk about the past as though women have always had it worse than all men, it makes it feel unreal and I think this generates to anger in the debate.

Fair enough scary. I've not heard of the history thing but eh ok.

On the other hand, I'm not sure that burying your head in the sand, pretending that women aren't in more danger, aren't murdered, raped, undervalued whether at home or at work, aren't discouraged from doing some subjects (or backhandedly encouraged - eg. become a scientist, learn how to make makeup!) is the right plan is it?

Sounds rather like gaslighting to me. On the one hand telling women to be careful, stick together when their out, and then on the other telling them that if they think they're in more danger then that's just promoting victimhood?

I think the real feminists are things like trades unionists, lawyers etc, and women making their way u self-consciously, not academic hair-splitters, but the movement has become one where insisting using the word history instead of something neutral can get a national campaign going to have you kicked off a campus, but won't address real dangers like economic polarisation of society.

Ok I'm not sure who you hang out with scaryclown but I don't recognise that form of feminism at all.

I don't disagree with feminism at all, just it's evolution into 'feminists' being word-police, women who hate men and want others to join them, and a paradigm that relies on characatures of men, no sense of history, and a tendency to shout at normal men for the actions of mental murderers, whilst doing nothing to address the actual issues.

One of the serious issue I have is that in order to recruit women to feminism, the movement currently relies on repositioning the safest world conditions we have ever had for both sees but especially for women, as the most dangerous, stay in the house fear-filled nightmare conditions, so that their arguments can gain traction. Making women afraid, so you can feel like both the expert and the kindly shoulder is abusive, not feminist, but that is what the movement has become. . Feminists say that women are in danger, can't be bosses, shouldn't do science etc etc, FAR more often than I hear it from men. . You can hear even children saying things like 'women aren't allowed to do boys subjects and I think that's unfair,' when it's complete bollocks to say that.

I also think the point of feminist arguments is entirely lost on some people. So they read that, for example, shaving is a choice made in the context of a patriarchal society that values beauty over anything else in a woman and they hear 'you're stupid for shaving your legs.' If that's how you interpret it, it must seem very aggressive.

Bear with me here but...
I kind of think feminism is an aggressive act.

If someone has absorbed all these messages that the world is a lovely place and nothing bad will happen to them because all the fights have been won and we can get back to making lovely choices that don't harm anyone and certainly aren't formed by societal norms and then feminists come along and speak truth, it can actually feel very aggressive. It can feel like an attack. It can feel like someone is coming along and shaking your foundations.

I don't for a moment regret refinding feminism in my 40s. But my world is a less pleasant and far less secure place now and I'm still reeling from that. It's like the 70s chat about 'consciousness raising' - it's a thing and often a rather unpleasant thing too. I don't wonder some feel battered by it.

'I am not sure the goal of feminism is to have women spending g their lives shouting at men, but that is often the net effect.'

Do you honestly believe this? Because I was going to challenge it, then I realised everything I said made you look like an idiot. So I'm assuming you're not an idiot and now I'm confused about how you can't realise that feminism has won women every single right they have. Were you unaware of that? (again sorry for making it seem like you're an idiot).

I find myself very angry at the huge trick I've fallen for throughout my life - i.e that feminism has won. Now I've had my kids and I'm not longer 'fuckable' I realise what a load of old bollocks it all is. Women are still valued more for their bodies than for anything else and always were.

So, I'm quite angry. And to be fair that probably does come across as aggression sometimes however hard I try not to have it so!

There isn't a 'patriarchy rule book' BTW, the patriarchy as a term to personify everything you feel is unfair to you compared with a sort of 'un-idealman' is actually incorrect.

I think a lot of so called feminists are actually just malcontents, who want men to take responsibility for their malcontentedness. The paradox is that in passing responsibility to men, you can end up building the walls that imprison you.

I am not sure the goal of feminism is to have women spending g their lives shouting at men, but that is often the net effect.

I think we were doing better in the 80s and 90s than now, as gender seemed to not just mean thug men and pretty women as it seems to now..

Theory and a clever altering of perception is not the same as fact. A lot of feminists treat statements like 'women can't be sexist' or 'patriarchy defines gender' as though they are scientific facts. They aren't, they are a perspective they would like the world to have,.

Any boss who thinks being a boss is about being a fucking arsehole deserves non cooperation. One issue is that alot of women who want to be in charge tend to ape the asshole bosses, because they have been told that men are in charge because they are aggressive, and so they get a boss job, behave like an arse, and get loads of resistance.

Feminism has started to become a thought police exercise over concerned with micro aggressions or turns of phrase, whilst doing nothing actually practical but shout at 'the oppressor', but shouting at someone in charge merely acknowledges and reinforces that power. A lot of hyperaware self titled feminists are effectively tantruming in the face of authority, which is why they can just get more and more frustrated.
Dismantling power or gaining power doesn't happen by shouting at it, saying 'please change'

I have seen posters mocked if they don't understand something or can't explain themselves in theroy based discussion

I have that seen happen only to people who try to defend misogyny. Never to people who admit that they don't understand/know enough to form an opinion.

If you are proud of your ignorance, well, you have to expect to be mocked for it.

Anything thats not nice or compliant or apologetic is perceived as aggressive in a woman and mistaken for assertiveness in a man.

I don't think that's an issue at all formerbabe - it's fine to say that you don't quite know how to express something - there'll always be plenty of posters willing to explore things with you.

It's quite ironic that given how 'emotional' women are supposed to be, when it comes down to it, it's always men's emotions we have to protect. Men are very very fragile, we can't in any way imply that they're not fantastic because we can't possibly hurt their feelings, ever. However, women are supposed to just accept being groped, assaulted, raped, killed because that's just the way things are and along the way we have to accept plenty of 'jokes' about how we're sluts etc.

Sometimes I feel a little unsure about posting on here...not because I think feminists are aggressive but because some of the posters on this board are extremely articulate and knowledgeable. I often struggle to explain theoretical ideas I may have.

It is because in patriarchy, the ideal is that women do not criticise men, ever.

Thus, even the mildest, nicest criticism of men is perceived as "aggressive".

We should start being really aggressive, in order to move the Overton Window.

There's an entry on TVTropes on "Designated Hero",

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DesignatedHero

complaining that the feminists from a certain webcomic come across as this (basically, heroes who are only heroes because the author says so, despite acting like villains), because:

"... and even have a member who, when questioned about why she "hates men," doesn't disagree with the idea and labels men as her oppressor."

So, that's what it needs for a woman to be a complete and utter villain and "Jerkass Straw Feminist" : To openly say that men are her oppressors and fail to disagree with the accusation that she "hates men".

Some of the topics or threads can be very serious for some( well me )and occasionally it can intimidate people also I have seen posters mocked if they don't understand something or can't explain themselves in theroy based discussion and I think this is where the femminists are aggressive comments come from,