Why are feminists so aggressive?

[BertrandRussell]

This, or something like it, it always being asked. People say that the FWR board on here is scary and hounds out people whose faces don't fit. That women are always being told they can't be feminists if.......And so on. And so on.

In my experiences, you are much more likely to get an aggressive response if you express a feminist point of view than the other way round. Is it just me? Or am I missing something?

There have been plenty of interesting feminists threads recently, where everyone seems to be holding their own- but the same old accusations keep coming up.

I also think the point of feminist arguments is entirely lost on some people. So they read that, for example, shaving is a choice made in the context of a patriarchal society that values beauty over anything else in a woman and they hear 'you're stupid for shaving your legs.' If that's how you interpret it, it must seem very aggressive.

"I think a lot of so called feminists are actually just malcontents, who want men to take responsibility for their malcontentedness."

scaryclown - do you really think that? And the bit about shouting at men, do you really think that too? Because I've seen you around here quite a bit, and I do wonder how you came to those conclusions......

I don't disagree with feminism at all, just it's evolution into 'feminists' being word-police, women who hate men and want others to join them, and a paradigm that relies on characatures of men, no sense of history, and a tendency to shout at normal men for the actions of mental murderers, whilst doing nothing to address the actual issues.

One of the serious issue I have is that in order to recruit women to feminism, the movement currently relies on repositioning the safest world conditions we have ever had for both sees but especially for women, as the most dangerous, stay in the house fear-filled nightmare conditions, so that their arguments can gain traction. Making women afraid, so you can feel like both the expert and the kindly shoulder is abusive, not feminist, but that is what the movement has become. . Feminists say that women are in danger, can't be bosses, shouldn't do science etc etc, FAR more often than I hear it from men. . You can hear even children saying things like 'women aren't allowed to do boys subjects and I think that's unfair,' when it's complete bollocks to say that.

Ok I'm not sure who you hang out with scaryclown but I don't recognise that form of feminism at all.

Ah, right. Not sure where to start with all that, scaryclown. I think I might be too old for it.

I do hope someone comes along in a bit with more energy.

I think the real feminists are things like trades unionists, lawyers etc, and women making their way u self-consciously, not academic hair-splitters, but the movement has become one where insisting using the word history instead of something neutral can get a national campaign going to have you kicked off a campus, but won't address real dangers like economic polarisation of society.

On the other hand, I'm not sure that burying your head in the sand, pretending that women aren't in more danger, aren't murdered, raped, undervalued whether at home or at work, aren't discouraged from doing some subjects (or backhandedly encouraged - eg. become a scientist, learn how to make makeup!) is the right plan is it?

Sounds rather like gaslighting to me. On the one hand telling women to be careful, stick together when their out, and then on the other telling them that if they think they're in more danger then that's just promoting victimhood?

Fair enough scary. I've not heard of the history thing but eh ok.

The biggest thing that secures equality is economic and political stability, fair distribution of resources, and legal protection. Ie the structures that are attacked as being 'the patriarchy' and its really frustrating when modern feminists talk about the past as though women have always had it worse than all men, it makes it feel unreal and I think this generates to anger in the debate.

"using the word history instead of something neutral can get a national campaign going to have you kicked off a campus"

It's political correctness gone mad, I tell you!

I'm finding it difficult to understand your point scary sorry. I've never met a feminist who argues that women had it worse than all men - that would be an entirely pointless argument and not what feminism is about at all. It's not a contest about who has it worse.

The biggest thing that secures equality is economic and political stability, fair distribution of resources, and legal protection

This woke me up!!

I consider myself a feminist. However, I’m also a sex worker.
When some feminists see that I’m of the ‘happy hooker’ variety, rather than the ‘vulnerable, drug addicted, abuse victim’ stereotype, I am treated with utter contempt.

The insults I (and other sex workers) have had thrown at us on the feminist board here are some of the worst insults I’ve ever seen sex workers subjected to.

To me, feminism is about improving the real-world safety and well-being of all women. Not slinging ideological mud at women who have made different choices with their own lives or bodies. And certainly not trying to tell other women that their consent isn’t true consent, or that their choices and opinions aren’t their own. It removes personal agency and is completely infantilising.

It’s this kind of attitude that pushes women away from feminism and attracts the ‘why are feminists so aggressive?’ comments.
Feminism isn’t seen as welcoming or understanding to different experiences and viewpoints, and there really is a sneery undertone towards anyone less educated or less able to express themselves articulately.

Feminists aren't all of one mind though Brazen. It's not essential for every feminist to agree with you or for you to agree with them. Names shouldn't be called etc but it is to be expected that there will be ideological disagreements - it's not a matter of us all just quietly smiling at each other.

I've seen some nasty vitriol from lib fems, including sex workers, spewed at women who have exited prostitution and who challenge their wine and roses view of it and instead talk about coercion and PTSD....

I did say 'some feminists' in my second line there Sparrow (in anticipation of your comment!)

I'm not saying all feminists should agree at all times.

Fair enough. I personally find it difficult to reconcile feminist views with sex work but it's not for me or anyone else to say whether you're a feminist or not.

Spartacus, I’ve never seen any vitriol thrown at ex-prostitutes who have experienced coercion and PTSD and would never act that way myself.

There’s a wide spectrum of experiences in sex work, and most liberal feminists and sex workers recognise that. But I’m not looking to derail the thread into another discussion about sex work.
Just offering up a perspective on why feminists may be regarded as ‘aggressive’.

"using the word history instead of something neutral can get a national campaign going to have you kicked off a campus"

It's political correctness gone mad, I tell you!"

So, you ask what I perceived as a genuine question, and a poster offers her point of view (that you obviously disagree with), and so you take the piss out of her, rather than counter her points. And you wonder why you are seen as "aggressive".

The university in question, BTW, was Cardiff Metropolitan

You also stated, in answer to the below

"also I have seen posters mocked if they don't understand something or can't explain themselves"

"I have never, ever, ever seen this"

Well, you just did it in your own post.

Now do you know what she means?

I looked up that Cardiff Metropolitan story and there's nothing there about the word history.

The biggest thing that secures equality is economic and political stability, fair distribution of resources, and legal protection. Ie the structures that are attacked as being 'the patriarchy

That made sense until you added that ridiculous sentence about the patriarchy.

Fair distribution of resources is not something that's happening in the patriarchy.

Exhibit A: Prostitution. Prostitution is the effect of a lack of fair distribution of resources.

Very obvious in that the males who have sex with women they aren't attracted to for the money (I hesitate to call it prostitution as the power dynamics are very different and the women may often not know what is going on) are typically from very poor country, and the women who pay them are from very rich countries.

Prostitution therefore, seems the result of a very steep inequality in distribution of resources. It would be interesting to see some study on the prevalence of prostitution and the distribution of wealth in different countries.

An argument could be made that abolishing the patriarchy via a revolution would lead, temporarily, to more male violence - but most feminists I know aren't proposing a typical revolution as solution, anyway. (The only ones who do that are also communists, which might explain it.)

Patriarchy also does not provide any legal protection to women, and as for economic stability ... um, no. Just no. The one country that took steps to ensure economic stability in the future is Iceland, a country that's ... not exactly the most patriarchal country there is.

I'm an aggressive feminist because sitting there tossing my hair and thinking "why oh why am I not treated as an equal" has done fuck all, so it's time for toughness, aggression and action.

Of course, if I was male I'd be a born leader with excellent assertiveness and determination. But I'm female, so I'm an aggressive shrieking harpy feminazi.

"So, you ask what I perceived as a genuine question, and a poster offers her point of view (that you obviously disagree with), and so you take the piss out of her, rather than counter her points. And you wonder why you are seen as "aggressive". "

But what she said happened didn't happen. She has posted several long paragraphs full of things that didn't happen.

Then surely mockery is the only sensible response?

Surely mockery is never a sensible response to somebody having a different point of view to your self?

Well I daren't post on here. Even on this thread the tone is confrontational and aggressive.
I'm 59 and grew up believing I was a feminist. Read about feminism and have always tried to challenge stereotypes. Tried to bring two sons up to recognise inequality and to be feminists.
Unfortunately their experience of reading about or talking about the subject among their generation is that feminism = anti male (sorry don't know the opposite of misogyny).

I never associated being a feminist with the anti male vitriol I read on MN. I guess maybe that means I'm not a feminist.