Not all men

[AskBasil]

Interesting article here

It doesn't bother me how the FWR is viewed on MN. The other sections of MN have plenty of women making feminist statements and behaving in feminist ways. If they don't want to use this section because it isn't their cup of tea, that's fine. I don't use every feminist site on the internet, and I don't frequent any site related to whole areas of left wing activism even though I agree with the activism. It is fine for different people to like and dislike different sites and boards.

I don't know I am doing feminism right. I've stated what I believe to be true.

What I haven't done is said 'my way is the only right way. Look how you are doing feminism wrong, kim'. Have I?

It's you who wants to lay down the law.

You may not realize how you are coming across, but you are being extremely rude. You are implying I'm not listening, and that I am defensive. You have not engaged properly with a single point I've made, nor apologised for defining me as not a person. I do not really see how I can be accused of 'not listening'.

kim, do you see yourself as a feminist? I thought you did, but it seems not.

I really don't see how I am resorting to insults. Yes, I'm saying you're being rude, because I feel you are. I am really hurt and upset by this thread. I thought you and I got on. I have spent hours PMing you about people who've upset you with revolting transphobic insults and trying to cheer you up, going to report those people, etc. I don't understand what it is I've done to deserve this kind of response.

"I also note that not many people have commented on the fact that cis people behave in exactly the same way when comments are made.

Some cis people. But if I say cis people, is that ok? Or should I modify my language because some feminists don't like the word "cis"?"

Kim, you keep banging on about how feminists enjoy cis privelege (which, I agree, we do) and how we don't seem to care about it. But many of us have said that yes, we do care, and if you have any specific points to raise with us about how to not oppress trans people which we might be missing, we're more than happy to hear them, internalise them and try not to be oppressive in the future.

But you don't give any actual examples, but rather just keep wafting the idea in front of us as if it would suddenly make us repentant for having been born with a vagina. So I suspect the reason no-one is engaging with you on this point is that we're not actually sure what point you're trying to make or what you'd like us to say.

kim - it's been explained further up the thread. You ignored it.

You were laying down the law - you've told me 'And comments like three highly committed mysgonists only turns people off feminism.'

It is really off. And I'm sorry, I'm going to take a break and go have a nice hot bath now.

Some of the feminism I dislike isn't necessarily a bad thing. It is a response to young women growing up in a world where social media is very important who have a different perspective of what certain problems are that they face. I think there are problems with their response, but I haven't got a better response myself and have to respect they are just trying to deal with it and that whole section of feminism will mature as they develop better responses to a new social world.

In the meantime, I'll continue to discuss the issues I think I do have some kind of grasp of and that I still think matter.

We don't all have to be doing the exact same thing. Sometimes we have to work on an issue with people we vehemently disagree with on other issues.

But as usual - feminists resort to insults, sarcasm and put downs.

Don't you mean some feminists?

Or, "when insults, sarcasm and put downs appear on a thread, they are more likely to have been posted by feminists"?.

"I also note that not many people have commented on the fact that cis people behave in exactly the same way when comments are made."

I have. I have asked you to tell me more.

maybe everything is feminist, as long as a feminist says it is

i just had some gazpacho. it was deliciously feminist.

if that seems trivial, bear in mind my gazpacho didn't insist i martyr myself to men's feelings in the hopes they might see me as human- a point wholly contingent on the language i use to argue my humanity

gee, in that context, my gazpacho was pretty feminist after all! (it didn't make vile racist statements as a rhetorical device, either)

LRD

Generally the issues discussed on FWR are (IMO) higher levels of academia, but often/sometimes the context (something many have said on here) is not set leaving the discussion open to abuse/derailment.

And chibi - you were quite right about the racist/Islamphobic comments earlier. I imagine you did realise they were not meant as actual truth but rather a device to make a point, although I can see how hurtful they could have been. I'm sorry some people didn't take your offence more seriously and apologise.

it's just funny, how, out of all the truths out there for comparison, even unpalatable ones, a completely false piece of racism is the one seized on

yep, funny indeed.

actually, it's pretty sick. and confronted with it, the poster stuck by it completely.

even after it was pointed out that making those comparisons adds to a culture that legitimises racist attacks on muslims

that's ok, i guess, as it was just a rhetorical device.

what is it, when the bnp do it?

I don't think that the issues discussed on FWR are higher levels of academia. I am helping DS revise for his GCCEs right now and the vast majority of what we discuss is less intellectually demanding that what he has to put forward in his GCSE Geography or RE answers, and he is not aiming for an A.

In fact, if they were mostly higher levels of academia I would not be able to comprehend them, because when people mention post structuralism, for example, I would not be able to discuss things in a post structuralist way because I'm not even sure what it means.

Discussion on the second wave thread, for example, The Female Eunuch is a popular text not an academic one, and I Know why the Caged Bird Sings is a GCSE set text, including for students of lower academic ability.

I think that women are capable of violence[prctically all of them]. I think that men are capable of violence[again, practically all of them].

I think that men[most men] struggle with self control quite a lot more than most women.
Hence there are many more problems with men than women.

I also think that that lot is in them all from birth[men and women]

But that their upbringing plays a contributing factor, and later happenings [such as getting involved with the "wrong" crowd] also play a part in how men especially, behave.

Thanks, Buffy.

I would argue, Kins, that the reason men are more violent is mostly down to societal conditioning. "Be a man", "Real men don't cry", "Don't be girl (ie, don't be weak or emotional)". "Stand up for yourself".

All of which results in the majority of men being somewhat emotionally crippled, unable to release their emotions, taught that it is weak (aka "womanly/feminine") to cry as an emotional release, that they must always be strong; physically and mentally.

Leaving men precious few ways to express their deeply felt emotions such as anger, disappointment, betrayal etc other than violence.