Not all men

[AskBasil]

Interesting article here

kim I've seen some pretty astonishing arguments from you on other threads but this one takes the biscuit. You seriously think it's okay to say that you associate terrorism with Muslims but women discussing feminism must make sure they don't offend men?

I come from an Irish background with a number of people in my family were / are republican. Like many or most Irish republicans, no-one in my family supports terrorism. Prior to 2003, the majority of terrorism in England was carried out by Irish republicans. Yes, it was racist to associate terrorism with Irish people.

If I'm listening to a conversation between e.g. black or Asian people where they say e.g. "white people do x or y", whether its IRL, on twitter or wherever, I might think "I don't do that" but the last thing on my mind would be to jump in and say "not all white people do that". But then I wasn't socialised to believe that I am entitled to centre conversations around me.

See where it gets me? Erm, it's getting me very nicely where I want to be so far, thank you.

I'm friends with loads of awesome women who don't take any shit - many of whom I've met through this board - I'm married to a bloke who thinks class analysis is important, as is its language, and I'm employed doing a job I love which involves teaching young people how to see these issues for themselves and how to make the world a better place.

I am actually quite happy about all that. I am not happy that it's not so good for other women, and I reckon if this worked for me, I have a duty to do my best to help it work for them too.

I fucking do Kim, and it's got me professionaal and personal respect, a brilliant relationship with the father of my children and a huge circle.of male and female.friends. Because NOT ALL MEN are entitled fuckwits put out by a bit of class based feminist analysis.

several thousand years of quietly trying to get them onside by being nice hasn't worked all that brilliantly, tbh, so yeah, i will talk how i want. i gave up trying to convince anyone of my personhood in 1991, and I'm not going back lol

anyway, thanks for all the racist fuckery, i won't stay to hear more as i have to paint my nails an alarming shade of coral and typing fucks up my manicure.

every time you post, it's like lifting up a rock, i see all kinds of things squirming.

Fuck it. Treat men how you want and see where it gets you.

There is something threatening in the undertone of this statement. What do you mean by "see where it gets you"? I've seen this before when men who claim to be feminists get frustrated that their trophy for meeting the minimum standards of human decency (as chibi brilliantly put it) is not shiny enough. It strikes me as a reference to the potential threat that men could make things a lot worse for women, if they weren't pandered to enough. Is that what you mean, kim?

I felt that, flora. I don't think it is intended as threatening, but as a statement it makes me shudder a bit.

I also think it is telling that, yet again, all the focus is on men, as if when we do class analysis, we are primarily 'treating men' a certain way, rather than, you know, talking about problems for women.

There is absolutely no sense that women are important.

Kim, you are reading these figures entirely incorrectly. 41% refers to the proportion of Muslims arrested for terrorism who went on to be convicted. It does not mean that 41% of all those arrested or convicted were Muslims. It is like saying that if one Buddhist is arrested and then convicted, 100% of terrorists are Buddhists because the Buddhist conviction rate is 100%. It makes no sense.

Sorry, I am wrong as well. It is the % of arrested Muslims who were charged, not convicted. Either way is is not the % of all terrorists who are Muslims.

But you know, percentages of Muslims arrested for anything aside, way to derail a really good debate, Kim.

LRD I think you are being very generous. I would like kim to explain that statement, I'm not sure how it was intended. I am well beyond the point of ascribing honourable intentions to kim based on the racist nonsense on display here and the continual centring of discussions around pandering to men on this and other threads.

I'm not being generous. I just can't square this with the person I thought I'd got to know.

Best way not to be accused of being racist? Don't be racist.

lol @ delusional narcissism

so when you do it, it's rhetoric and making a point

what's it called when it's the bnp doing it? or is it different because you mean well and think you're nice

Your figures were wrong though and your reading of them is skewed by a racist perception. Plenty of posters have been through why this analogy doesn't stand up, but you haven't responded to them.

You've been massively hypocritical, deploying arguments about context for your own language but not accepting them from feminists.

You refuse to see that treatng men as a linguistic category the same way as treat oppressed or.minority groups is actually granting them some of the same structural privilege that they enjoy in society, or refuse to engage in that point.

Saying you want feminism to succeed but insisting that we do it without offending men is just twisted. Men should be offended by the idea that they are perceived as violent. But not for the reasons you suggest.

kim reflect for one moment on what people are saying here. Even people who normally defend you to the hilt are asking you to consider what you are saying. Your response is to complain that you are being "accused" of things. Maybe you are being accused of things because you are actually doing them? You do sound like a BNP person saying "well I can say that black people are associated with crime because it's true that black people disproportionately commit crimes because statistics..." How can you not see that? You seem to think you can say anything you like about feminism, women and now apparently race and not be challenged on it. Why? And you bang on and on with repeating the same points when some people are spending so much time trying to nuance the discussion. Despite this, if you say something OTT, it's because you've been made to snap. [Hmm]

I've RTFT.

Please stop attacking Kim, it's appalling to read.

No one is attacking Kim. We are all a bit shocked by some of the things she has said is all. On this thread she has:

Told people they are doing feminism wrong.
Told people that they should temper their message so as not to make men sad.
Posted in a racist manner, misusing stats.
Become more and more defensive.

I am pretty shocked to be fair, because I had always thought Kim was very sensible and had important things to say. Today has not been her finest hour.

What is appalling lemonmuffin? Trying to have a feminists discussion about how feminist discussions get derailed by NAMALT and having that discussion derailed by NAMALT, must be nice to menz but Muslims are associated with terrorism?

She's posting a different slant on feminism.

Maybe see if you can learn a few things from her.