Is feminism all about man hating?

[PedanticPanda]

When feminism is brought up around my DP and my other friends they all say the same thing,

I agree with feminists who want equal rights for men and women, but not feminists who hate men and want women to be treated better than men.

Do these feminists actually exist? I assumed that feminism was all about equal rights etc, I thought all the man hating was a stereotype but wasn't actually true, but, most people I know seem to think this is the idea of the majority and it's the minority of feminists who want equal rights.

I think one of the problems is men constantly whining that "not all of us are the same!" No, I'm sure you're not, but it's a lot easier just to say "men shouldn't do X" instead of "So and so and him over there shouldn't do X, but the rest of them can because they're fine".
If you're so worried about being generalised, how about trying to change the men who are like that rather than emphasising how you're not?

Soz Takver - it was TeiTua! (need glasses)

Dr John - just a quick point - there are plenty of examples where both direct and indirect racism is also tolerated, so I don't think it's safe to suggest that racism is always taken more seriously than sexism (or any other form of oppression is automatically better or worse than another.)

And, of course there are people who are both women and Black, and their experience of oppression and discrimination may have features of that faced by Black men and non Black women, but is likely to be distinct because they hold both identities - they are Black women.

MrGin Is there a point you're trying to make in quoting from a thread that was incredibly heated and has been deleted ?

The poster you initially quoted has stated on numerous occasions that she didn't hate men so picking up on a quote which has been deleted is a bit unfair.

No-one's disagreeing that some women as individuals hate men. Quite why you've chosen to pick one poster who is no longer here as proof is beyond me.

The conversation is about feminism, not a particular woman, or poster.

What's your point mrgin? And why have you kept an entire thread? How positively creepy

MrGin - did you just quote a deleted thread there? From a copy that you made?

And if you are going to quote deleted threads, at least say which poster you are quoting. I hope you aren't trying to pass that off us something dittany or myself said.

I hope you aren't trying to pass that off us something dittany or myself said

lol. Not really your style is Beachcomber.

I don't agree.

If you read the thread, that you appear to have a copy of, it became quite clear that it had nothing to do with feminism but with personalities.

Everyone else has made constructive points - you have used a poster as an example which is unfair and goes against the ethos of this section. I thought we had put that issue behind us.

I think one of the problems is men constantly whining that "not all of us are the same!" No, I'm sure you're not, but it's a lot easier just to say "men shouldn't do X" instead of "So and so and him over there shouldn't do X, but the rest of them can because they're fine".
If you're so worried about being generalised, how about trying to change the men who are like that rather than emphasising how you're not?

So men who say that people should be treated as individuals and not all tarred with the same brush are whining? If anyone were to make such sweeping generalisations about women or black people or anyone else it would be found offensive for criticism of such prejudice to be called whining. After making this criticism of men you then promote us to Gods who can apparently stop evil acts from happening. I only wish I were blessed with such super powers. I can assure you that if I had these powers that women would be a lot safer than they are.

it became quite clear that it had nothing to do with feminism but with personalities.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

I'm glad you are finding this funny.

Are you now saying that it isn't me, but implying that it was dittany who said that?

I don't have a copy of the thread because I don't gather ammunition on MN.

I know perfectly well which poster said that though because I have a working memory. And it wasn't dittany.

Why are you stirring like this MrGin?

Not Gods, responsible human beings who can see that they have an obligation on themselves, their sons, their male friends, their fathers, their uncles etc etc to ensure that sexism is no longer acceptable, that stripclubs are not acceptable, that judging a women by what she wears is acceptable, by teaching your sons that sex requires a woman's active participation and that anything else IS rape. Not Gods, just responsible human beings who play their part in humanity.

So are you saying that all men don't do those things you ask of us blistory because you seem to be tarring all men with the same brush.

Where did I say that ? You may well believe that all those things are unacceptable but the fact remains that men, as a collective, don't.

Otherwise it wouldn't go on. Quite how you can see me, as one of the most liberal feminists on here, as someone who tars men with the same brush, I don't know.

You were the one who referenced God, quite possibly the figurehead for the whole patrichal society.

Blistory, I don't see a quote of dittany - rather a paraphrasing of what she posted .

I'm not sorry that I responded - I have been keeping away from here on purpose, in order to let the new section get off the ground without regulars like me about. But I won't stand for that sort of thing.

Yes and also, note the spelling. It's unwise to offend cannibals.

What I meant about Stoltenberg possibly feeling freer to comment on male behaviour than a straight man might, was that a gay man wouldn't expect everything he said to be heard with the addition "Maybe this is just a ploy by a heterosexual man". If a man talks publicly along lines of "Men are cruel to women" then he might expect people to think that by (apparently) being kind, he'd be trying to get close to women. And then there's the question of being a "real man"--are men unwilling to step out of line with other men, and say something like "Page 3 of the Sun is demeaning to women, but we men should be embarrassed that so many of us want to see that stuff." Maybe in the "War between the sexes" a homosexual is neutral and can comment on both sides.

MrGin, did you read that article about Gandhi that DrJsCat listed? If we admire Gandhi, we ought to know about all of his opinions. And as the article says (written by a man!) Gandhi's reputation gives a respectable appearance to some very bad things. I suppose Gandhi himself would have said that keeping women down was authentically Indian, and the notion of equal rights was imported and thus a hangover from imperialism. Here is is again:

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jan/27/mohandas-gandhi-women-india

If we could go back to the OP, did she make clear whether the friends she quoted were men, women or both? Does feminism have a fundamental problem 'selling' itself to women generally? Or have I misunderstood Panda's post?

Where did I say that ? You may well believe that all those things are unacceptable but the fact remains that men, as a collective, don't.

Men as a collective? I am no more responsible for other mens actions than you are. Calling us a collective actually reinforces my point. My wife and I are appalled by the actions of some Brits abroad but we act like ambassadors for our country whilst abroad. We treat other nationalities with respect. We are embarrassed by our compatriots behaviour but we can't stop them doing bad things.
BTW I agree about religion being misogynist but then I'm atheist so I don't feel responsible for that either. :-).

There's almost certainly a far, far higher percentage of individual men who not only hate women but actively work to harm them, than feminists who hate men and want them all locked up, owned, executed, whatever. Think of those insane US bucketheads best known for their anti-choice activism, and note some of the additions they make. Like the one who wants the victim (or plaintiff) in cases of rape or DV, to be formally referred to as 'the accuser' - but that this should only happen when in cases of rape or DV. Not insurance fraud, not burglary, not bar brawls.... just cases where the victim is a woman who has been harmed by a man.