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.

BertrandRussell

I have no desire to 'tone police'. I was simply pointing out that you made a response based on sarcastic contempt, which may be why some people feel this board, or individuals on it, behave in an aggressive and hostile manner.

Indeed, I think the feminists on this thread have answered the question in the OP - you (collectively, the FWR community) do act in a hostile, angry and aggressive fashion and you feel justified in doing so because opposition to your ideology is emotionally distressing and morally wrong.

"have no desire to 'tone police'. I was simply pointing out that you made a response based on sarcastic contempt"

Yes you are. You are saying that in order to be "acceptable" a feminist must not respond to a seriously ridiculous post perpetuating a damaging urban myth in a mildly sarcastic manner. This is not a standard which would be expected of any other group of people

"Again, the hostile tones aren't always conveniently in response to 'seriously ridiculous post perpetuating a damaging urban myth', but often replies to other's opinions that differ to your own"

Interesting that the one chosen as an example was though........

Bertrand

I have not made any statements about what is acceptable. I have only posted to answer the question: "why are feminists so aggressive?"

As you say, many other groups of people react emotionally when they feel their ideology is threatened.

There are also posts Twibble where men are praised to the hilt if they 'babysit' their children, put out the rubbish, know where the towels are kept. Ask for help when buying a bra for their child. Make the dinner.

All praise these wonderful men eh? Such keepers!

As you say, many other groups of people react emotionally when they feel their ideology is threatened.

Is this directed at feminism? I can't speak for anyone else, but it's impossible to threaten feminism, as far as I'm concerned.

One can disagree with it, and one can threaten women. But as a concept, to me, it's impossible to threaten.

Mephistopheles- that really s a cheap post. You picked my post out by name as an example of feminist aggression. And you are now refusing to accept that a bit of extremely mild sarcasm was a response acceptable under abt circumstances to the posting of a damaging urban myth as fact. You are now suggesting that I responded as I did "because my ideology was threatened" not because someone posted a lie. Cheap, unfair and , I have to say, beneath you.

Datun

Trans-activists claim that their ideology is threatened by people questioning it or proposing counterarguments; Indeed, they feel that their very identities are threatened. As feminists on here have suggested, it may be possible that people react defensively to feminist statements because their 'status-quo' is ideologically threatened.

This isn't uncommon among people who put their ideologies at the centre of themselves, or simply believe strongly enough in their moral position.

Bertrand, thanks for the reply. Some of the posts on that thread do indeed strike me as mocking damaging stereotypes. Others show an open contempt for men that is surely damaging for all.

If there was a 'Dadsnet' and a similar thread appeared about men changing to women and suddenly having the urge to nag, or obsess about their bum size or whatever, it would rightly be condemned as horribly misogynistic, no matter how 'light-hearted' the intention.

In a way I think it is unfortunate that it appeared on the Feminism board as I don't believe a lot of the posters thereon are regulars here. But nonetheless I think if anyone's teenage son read it ( by some strange chance) they would immediately think feminism's main aim was to mock them simply for their gender.

BertrandRussell

I haven't made any statements as to the acceptability or otherwise of your response, merely that - as you yourself have admitted - it was sarcastic (and as a result, perhaps contemptuous). I certainly wasn't singling you out, or assessing your response for anything but the emotional impact it may have had on others.

As you say, your response may have been entirely justified; But it wasn't informative, corrective or analytical. How should it be characterised if not as an emotional response, and how should it be framed if not as a response to a (probably bad, unfactual) opposing argument to your ideology?

I apologise if you feel I have been antagonistic towards you, or deliberately insulting, and I'll endeavour towards greater clarity of my language.

Twibble- I notice that you only responded to part of my post- do you have any thoughts on the rest?

Incidentally, I have a 16 year old son. I am pretty sure he would recognize and be amused by the stereotypes on that thread. Particularly if he had read the opening post and understood the context. And particularly if he was aware of the "Modest Proposal" element of the thread. That it is risible for women to claim male privilege- but not vice versa.

I agree entirely, Twibble.

Twibble you show an open contempt for women though. There are many websites that openly show contempt for women in the manner in which you demonstrate.

My son would read that thread and take it for the sarcasm it was intended. It simply highlights the obvious differences within. He doesn't believe in gender either. Perhaps he ought to be rescued?

Cross post slightly with Bertrand but yes, my son would definitely see the irony intended.

People like twibble and MephistophelesApprentice expect that an online discussion, entirely ironic, should take into account the emotional responses of others?

Thought police is a phrase that comes to mind.

Ah sorry MephistophelesApprentice

I thought the ideology in question was feminism, not transactivism. I completely agree that transgenderism is now ideology based. But not feminism. The reasons for feminism are identifiable and verifiable.

Elendon

I have said nothing about online discussions taking into account the emotions of others. I am very much of the 'wild west' approach to the internet, and entirely against 'thought policing' or censorship of any kind. I have nothing but utter contempt for those who believe in online 'safe spaces' or who react with shudders at imagined offence.

But imagine for a second that you found a 'light hearted' thread like Tribble imagined about men pretending to be the worst stereotypes of women. How would you react? And if one of the posters defended it by saying "I imagine if my 16 year old daughter saw it, she'd be fine!" would you believe them?

Datun

Most people hold strongly to their ideologies because they believe, in their hearts, that the reasons for it are identifiable and verifiable.

"But imagine for a second that you found a 'light hearted' thread like Tribble imagined about men pretending to be the worst stereotypes of women. How would you react? And if one of the posters defended it by saying "I imagine if my 16 year old daughter saw it, she'd be fine!" would you believe them?"

In the particular circumstances surrounding that thread, then yes I would. But maybe this is not the thread to discuss trans issues?

Most people hold strongly to their ideologies because they believe, in their hearts, that the reasons for it are identifiable and verifiable.

I daresay they do. But as statistics do not require my belief, only my reading ability, feminism isn't one of them.

But MA you agreed with everything Twibble posted. And are now contradicting yourself.

Also, I cannot stand self serving libertarians like yourself. Hope I'm making myself clear. Take your 'wild west' approach to your shed.

Bertrand

i though the rest of your post was reasonable, as you usually are :) But the context is invisible to most. They will go onto the Feminism board, see a 20 page thread mocking men, and think that is what feminism is about. Intended irony (and frankly I'm damn sure a lot of posts weren't ironic) means nothing to them.

Elendon

So to be consistent you think that men should be able to say whatever they want about women and not worry about whether or not it damages women emotionally? That's an interesting viewpoint but not one I agree with.

And your user name MA is particularly insensitive in a feminist forum.

Mephistopheles helps Faust seduce a beautiful and innocent girl, usually named Gretchen, whose life is ultimately destroyed when she gives birth to Faust's bastard son. Realizing this unholy act, she drowns the child, and is held for murder. However, Gretchen's innocence saves her in the end, and she enters Heaven after execution.

The above quote was taken from this:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faust