To dislike "Radical Feminism"

[InternetPerson]

I've got nothing against feminists that fight for womens rights and genuinely want the best the best for everyone and don't hate anyone, but "RadFems" tend to be full of bitterness and hatred. And I'm not just talking about kids, these are high profile, intelligent women with power and influence. Do you think it's unreasonable to dislike something where most people think men are inherantly evil and to be feared? Or do you think their hatred is fair and we should respect them for their good work in trying to make humans hate eath other even more?

Like, I said, I have nothing against Feminism, it's done a lot of great work down the years and still does, but "Rad Fem" and "Feminism" are too completly different things in my opinion. Is this a wrong conclusion?

AIBU?

Let's all just take a moment to let Autumn look up the word 'radical' in a dictionary.

Equality at work, not accepting men's violence towards women, equal rights in law, fighting against issues such as FGM, slavery in the sex industry, the right to vote just to name a few issues

What is there to compromise on

What a word "depicts" in a dictionary doesnt necessarily mean what it portrays Cote. You do know that though im sure.

We know what is wrong Enthusiasm, I just dont want to be associated with "radical" it depicts something other than what is stated in a dictionary and gets peoples backs up, therefore more time is spent defending than actually getting a job done.

Ooh, heres an idea. You could check the wikipedia definition of radfem? I know we could have all edited it, but so could random MRAs so it should be relatively reliable?

The BBC series to which I pointed people shows very well the attempts through the last 5000 years to silence women. We are harder to silence these days although men always do try to stop women speaking. Just look at what the Labour women who stood for leadership have found (I don't share their politics but I agree with them on this issue).

I certainly support the right of women to discuss things with anyone they want to. They don't always get that opportunity.

Compromise? The women's suffrage movement got the following in order; women get to vote in local elections if they pay taxes, women over 30 can vote, women over 21 can vote, women over 18 can vote. Compromise would have been to stop at women over 30. Wouldn't it? A little of what we want, a little of what they want.

We have compromise now in wage equality. It's better but not equal.

Fuck that shit. Radical change is needed.

Talk amongst yourselves now. I am going to have to agree to disagree on this.

"What a word "depicts" in a dictionary doesnt necessarily mean what it portrays"

Wow, you and Ego are two peas in a pod, aren't you

She believes that the definitions of 'female' and 'woman' are wrong in dictionaries. We haven't got to the point where she tells us what they should be defined as, but I'm guessing it will be something like "Whoever thinks they are either of these words, regardless of the physical reality of their genitals, DNA, and overall biology."

Ehhmm, Cote. People are people at the end of the day and some are gender fluid so Im not sure there should be a quote in any dictionary. If so, it should not be used to quote about another person saying severe is wrong.

The word "radical" tends to annoy conservatives (small "c") because they want things to stay the same;
in fact they often want to turn back the clock to a society even more run by white middle-aged males than it is now.

If we changed "radical" to "cosy fluffy feminist" we'd still be hated, because nit-picking about a word is just to divert attention from their opposition to radical / fluffy changes to society.

apologies, there should not be a word in a dictionary.

That's true re conservative outlook and radical ideas.

Obviously at odds and scary. Change is scary, even if you're on the side that stands to gain.

Im not conservative by any means. No one has to change it to cozy fluffy feminist either? why are you being so ridiculous? Oh I know, there isnt a middle ground there. There isnt a compromise.

It took a bloody civil war to abolish slavery in the US, because sweet talk & gentle progress wasn't working.
The original US Constitution said slaves counted as 3/5 of a person, so I suppose a compromsie would have been to let the owners of Southern cotton plantations keep their slaves and their profits, but increase the worth of a slave to 4/5 of a person.

Most really important advances in society were achieved by radicals, not fluffy bunnies

I get that Buffy, but radical is not the way. It scares many and divides.

Radical is out of date in our society and no longer needs to be BigChoc.