AIBU to wonder why any woman would identify herself as....

[seeker]

.....not a feminist?

FFS dittany. I did not mean all....but you carry on with your special aggressive brand of feminism that makes everyone feel stupid and inferior to your iron ruling. Woo hoo for feminism, I expect all the undecided are now resolute.

I didn't misrepresent you, Dittany. I asked about your perceptions. My question cannot possibly be seen as a misrepresentation of you or what you said.
To explain further, it was a straightforward follow-on question to your post, which said:
I think there are quite a few people who have some misogynistic views who think they should be able to air them in the feminist section and get upset when they get challenged.
i guess it's just a matter of perception.

I can't ask you "Which posters have some misogynistic views?" because, in doing so, I'd be fully accepting your view of which views are misogynistic and who holds them. And can't assume I fully accept your view. What I did was a very civil attempt to further your point, and even give you an opportunity to malign my own views if you wish - to state your perception.

The fact that two short posts, which should have formed the beginning of a respectful discussion, have led to this kind of juvenile word-slinging, is precisely why I make a conscious effort NOT to engage with these threads.

Extremists in all walks of life are often unpleasant. I doubt the rad fems are any different. There is no doubt in their mind they are right and discussion is impossible. I think several of us have encountered those on the feminism board and have backed away. What is the point of posting if you can't have a discussion?

By that logic then your previous statement of -

"I think there are quite a few people who have some misogynistic views who think they should be able to air them in the feminist section and get upset when they get challenged. "

We could just ignore the use of the words "quite a few" and assume you mean all of us who've said we aren't keen on the feminism section and/or on identifying as feminists.

I have no idea why the thread has moved either. Nowt to do with me guv. I might however venture to suggest it might have been the multiple references to the feminist board made by numerous posters. I have always thought that if you are going totalk about someone, it might be polite not to say anything you might not like to say to their face some day.

I will however say one thing. This thread has been polite in certain places and quite vicious in others. Anyone who now comes on to say that the tone has lowered because of the moves is lying.

Anyway, to go back to the discussion. I would like to thank Niecie for taking the trouble to give me examples of the things she thinks are feminism's nutty ideas. I see MarySue hasn't bothered to be so polite. But since TinaLeena has continued where MarySue left off, I shouldn't complain.

Now I am far from being an authority on these things, but I shall give my understanding on the matter.

1. Feminists not caring about boys education even though girls seem to better these days: I think the response I would give you would be that as a feminist I care that boys are not always well served by the current education system. However, as I have said before, my interest as a feminist is to promote girls' rights and leave the promotion of male interests to male action groups. I would ask you if you would criticise a disabled rights campaigner for not doing anything to fight against discrimination against traveller children. If not, why make this criticism against feminists for fighting for women (as a group)?

1. The whole socialisation vs. biology debate. There are a wide range of opinions within feminism on this one. My own view (and I stress it is my personal opinion) is that the answer is not one nor the other. As I have said on this thread, I think socialisation happens on the base of real biological difference. Biology cannot explain everything and neither can socialisation. However, I think as a feminist I am always wary of biological "explainations" because often they come across as -and are frequently misinterpreted as- saying that "nature" is endorsing certain gender stereotypes that society hold dear. "Men are more visual naturally" for example, "women are better at talking about their emotions than men naturally." "women are naturally nurturing" etc etc. I think that noone can really argue with a straightface that no element of education has gone into the fact that some women are nurturing or good at talking about their feelings. Or that men have often been discouraged from childhood from doing the same. These are facile examples, but I hope that they serve to make my point clear.

"It's interesting about this thing about people being "enticed" here"

Who said anything about that? Aside from in the fact that a thread we were previously taking part in over in AIBU has been moved over.

"1. Feminists not caring about boys education even though girls seem to better these days: I think the response I would give you would be that as a feminist I care that boys are not always well served by the current education system. However, as I have said before, my interest as a feminist is to promote girls' rights and leave the promotion of male interests to male action groups. I would ask you if you would criticise a disabled rights campaigner for not doing anything to fight against discrimination against traveller children. If not, why make this criticism against feminists for fighting for women (as a group)?"

That makes sense, and (at least in my case) is why I prefer not to identify as feminist.

there's no love, kindness or real debate

there's: this is feminism, if you don't agree you're a misogynist

Thank you Hully, that in a nutshell is the problem with the Feminism section and its self-appointed watchdogs.

TinaLeena: your posts express some ideas that I have heard before from acquaintances in the US. They are similarly opposed to government intromission in everything. In the UK there are not very many libertarians however. Would I be correct to surmise that you are from the US?

well-i define myself as rad fem.
the reason for this is i feel that rad fem is fighting the root of the problem-
partriarchy.
i hate the partriarchy with a vengance.
i feel its the partriarchy that has caused me big problems in my life-
its this that has-enabled others to fuck me off and fuck me over from the word go!
and they all got a handshake for it.
all in the name of partriarchy!
its still happening now-the fighting that i have to do for my dc.my underclass sisters-and yes-the young men/boys getting shot/shooting each other.
theres a root cause!!
this is whats bothering me-i dont want to fight with other women and i dont hate men.

^Catitainahatita Sun 03-Jul-11 20:55:16

I will however say one thing. This thread has been polite in certain places and quite vicious in others. Anyone who now comes on to say that the tone has lowered because of the moves is lying.^

I am working on the assumption you are including my comment here. I didnt say the tone had lowered since the move. I said I was interested it had changed since the move.

Just wanted to reiterate that.

hey-im not evilim friendly and always willing to talk.

Sparky , we may well be divided on the rad fem issue (or the way I feel, fem full stop!), but this I love:

^theres a root cause!!
this is whats bothering me-i dont want to fight with other women and i dont hate men.^

"Empusa, Crapola said this a little up the thread:

"How is anyone supposed to be enticed into feminism""

Fair enough, I missed a sentence. I apologise.

Empusa: Perhaps I should emphasise again that as a feminist I care about boys education. However my resources and energies are finite. If I spread about my activism to cover all the injustices in society I would never get to bed ever. I have to choose what is most important to me and where I feel I can be most effective. This is why I chose women's rights. When these interests and aims overlap with other groups I am quite happy to work with them.

I say this because I get the impression (and correct me please if I am wrong) you are saying that feminism (and thus me indirectly) are selfish. I am not trying to be offensive, and if you don't mean this at all, I repeat please tell me so and I will apologise for saying it.

Toddler, sorry yes I should have been clearer saying "from now on" as I was talking in the future tense.

I do think that some posters/women in =general are put off by some extreme views and being branded with misogynist are put off, that's a real shame. If the accusations were less forthcoming I think they would engage a little more. I have personal battles with my own less feminist thinking and actions, I am not worried if I'm challenged and find it thought provoking. I don't even mind people picking apart my POV and throwing it back at me. But for some people they prefer a coaxing and not a shaming or chastisement and these people are possibly more in need of a bit of feminism in their lives. How are they supposed to access that if they are accused of 'not being feminist' oir worse, 'being a misogynist', 'having misogynist thinking'?

"I say this because I get the impression (and correct me please if I am wrong) you are saying that feminism (and thus me indirectly) are selfish. I am not trying to be offensive"

Oh no, I didn't mean that at all! I guess that I'm just not the most focussed person and I prefer to cover as many bases as possible, so for me, only dedicating myself to women's rights only doesn't feel right. I guess the world needs a mix of approaches.

well-i dont really see why we have all these disputes really.
personnally-i know a lot of my views are extreem and others views might not be but-
i feel we can all listen and hear ech other-we might not always agree but it would be good to hear where each is coming from and why-thats when we will understand each other and not fight with each other.
discussions good-fighting each other isnt.
we can all take a part in feminism in maybe diffrent angles-but this could be a good thing.
if we can come together-it would be a good way to fuck up the partriarchy.
but we dont need to fight with each other.
if we come together we will be stronger as a group-the other alternitive is fighting among each other and feminism being a split-not good.
that way-no one wins.
and we will still be doing this in twenty years if we cant come together.
i have spent time arguing and fighting with men-it seems mad that feminists are fighting with each other.
the patriarchy is laughing.
we need to fight at diffrent angles and agree to do this-not run each other over.[and help each other]