Men who parade how "feminist" they are but who can fuck right off...

[ArcheryAnnie]

...as they don't actually want to listen to women who disagree with them in any way.

I am not including common-or-garden arseholes here, as the list would be a billion posts long and the internet would explode. I am talking about the kind of man who writes a long, handwringing article in the Guardian about how we should all listen to feminists more, but then deletes most of the comments from actual feminists that are posted on it.

The two currently at the top of my very long List are:
Ally Fogg
Owen Jones

Nominations, please.

Sadly Owen Jones doesn't really give a shit about women or feminism. He only gives a shit about owenjonesism. End of.

Owen Jones really is a dreadful brat.

I made a comment about him, which didn't @ him and he tweeted me back to tell me I was a homophobe.

Me, the one who marched against Clause28 before he was a twinkle in his daddy's eye, I am a homophobe, because the misogynist child said I was.

This made me rather angry yesterday.

Oh, has he redefined homophobe to mean "person who doesn't like Owen Jones"?

Yup. Pretty much.

It's ok though, he 'defers to feminists like Laurie Penny'. Is she some sort of stamp of feminist approval?

Christ, Puffins, that really is telling (and annoying). Women aren't people so any activism they do can safely be ignored and discounted. In Owen's world we are whatever he decrees we are, whatever our lives and experiences.

If he wants to defer to feminists like Laurie Penny rather than justify his own published opinions, he should give his space in the Guardian over to her.

Or Everyday Feminism, another 'source' he cites over and over again.

Owen has got more than a thousand retweets of his tweet "Why we desperately need women to dominate politics - basically that’s what’s come out of #leadersdebate"

Christ, what a steaming hypocrite he is.

We've got to remember though, that we only get respect and support if we are the right kind of women. Similar to that narrow line between 'slut' and 'frigid' except this is the line between wanting rights/respect/freedom from oppression and wanting too many rights/too much respect/too much freedom from men. He, of course, gets to dictate that line we must walk down.

I've got another one for The List! PZ Myers, biologist, "freethought" blogger and prominent skeptic. Thinks himself very much one of the good guys. Posted this today on twitter:

"What’s with all these TERFs nattering at me?"

So, in eight words managed two gendered slurs! Because there's nothing worse than women "nattering", amiright?

Well done, PZ. You made The List.

I saw that, just thought ugh.

I think all of the feminism on freethought blogs is liberal feminism. Possibly because it's do connected with atheism, and the atheists hate the ladies with the same passion as every religion. They just don't realise it.

ArcheryAnnie wrote - "PZ Myers, biologist, "freethought" blogger and prominent skeptic. Thinks himself very much one of the good guys. Posted this today on twitter:
"What’s with all these TERFs nattering at me?""

Scepticism can lead a person to question and reject old ideas. Scepticism can also lead a person to question and reject new ideas. I get the impression that the scepticism of Myers has led him to question and reject old biology in favour of recent transactivist ideas of female penis and male vagina. I think this may explain why he then negatively criticised feminists who don't agree with him and transactivists.

Last I heard, Myers is a specialist in the study of fish and other marine creatures, such as cuttle fish, squid and octopuses. Has his awareness of hermaphroditism in marine creatures led him to make one too many extrapolations onto the biology of humans?

PZ Myers was a professor of mine. He's no intellectual heavyweight, I can tell you that much. He latched on to the freethought stuff and had a blog before a lot of atheists did, that's all.

And he's sexist as FUCK.

Why we desperately need women to dominate politics - basically that’s what’s come out of #leadersdebate"

On the basis that Sturgeon did well? I didn't watch it, entirely due to her being involved. She is beyond irritating . Wasn't she given an easy time?

I don't think any posters on the thread are giving that or any other OJ tweet the time of day, Still!

I didn't watch it either, but there were two other female party leaders too.

The woman from the Green party ? With her mad ideas on prostitution.

There's a thread about Owen Jones in AIBU. Someone said he is the Orwell of our times. I very much doubt that.

A new nomination:

Peter fucking Tatchell and his piece on p0rn

So, first off, people who recognise that p0rn is insidious and far from great as far as women's rights go are puritans... then.....

While he agrees that actors in p0rn might be victims:

In their view, all porn actors are victims. Many definitely are. But not all. Some are consenting adults who have freely chosen to be part of the sex industry.

That's ok, because:

Not everyone measures up to the fitness and good looks that popular culture promotes as sexually desirable. It is cruel and inhuman to deny isolated, disabled, overweight, ugly and elderly people the erotic fulfilment that porn can provide.

We all grow old and lose our pulling power. But our sexual desire may remain strong. It needs and deserves an outlet. That's when sexy pictures and films can come to our rescue, helping people maintain pleasure and satisfaction during old age.

So, as long as men can't pull, they need to wank, so women have to be abused on film to satisfy that need? I don't even know where to start on the men have neeeeeeds aspect of it all.

To justify their anti-porn crusade, the new puritans point to snuff movies, kiddie porn, rape videos, trafficked or coerced actors and degrading, humiliating images of women. Sure, this stuff is vile and wrong - and some of it should be criminalised to protect the vulnerable.

I wonder which bits he thinks should be criminalised, and, more importantly, which bits he thinks are ok and therefore shouldn't be? Snuff movies, perhaps? Films of children being raped? Or merely the humiliation of women?

For that paragraph alone, he should be condemned as a fucking horrible human being.

Can we add Maajid Nawaz (Lib Dem PPC) who is a 'self pro-claimed feminist' who thinks it's ok to purchase women for lap dances and then pester them and touch them while dancing (according to the news). And then said this on FB

"Objections to my describing myself as a feminist might seem at first sight to have more merit. Some feminists take the view that visiting such gentlemen’s clubs objectifies women. Others, many women too, take a more sex-positive view, and believe that erotic dancing is empowering to women. My feminism, as intended by me, extends to empowering women to make legal choices, not to judge the legal choices they make. My fight is for rights. The right of men or women who choose to cover their heads, or their right to uncover their bodies. As long as both are by choice, I will defend people’s right to do either. Others may have their own view, but that is the extent of my feminism. And again, therefore, there is no hypocrisy in me visiting a strip club for a stag night."

So much Fuck Offness. So much.

Yes, because women who see that abusing women is a bad thing are in some way sex negative. Christ alone knows what that even means.

And those two men are perfect examples about why 'choice feminism or 'sex-positive' feminism is all about the men and their entitlement.