Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Deflection - as an anti-feminist act

55 replies

LaSqrrl · 22/05/2018 09:06

On another thread, *AngryAttackKittens" asked:

If we're suggesting threads I just posted on the tshirt thread that maybe we need a group discussion about the tendency for some women to identify the thing blocking women's progress as being other women not getting with the program/letting the side down rather than men/the system actively blocking women's progress. It comes up in a lot of different contexts, that idea that the real problem is women not doing activism/life perfectly, and I think it would be an interesting topic to thrash out, but can't think how to frame it in terms of starting a thread. Someone who's better at titles than me could have a go?

In my opinion, the tactic is very much a "look over here, don't look over there" tactic. Meaning, we are onto something. Every single time some male, or libfem, says "this is way more important, why aren't you focusing on that?" it usually means, "shitfuck, the jig is up, they are endangering male domination in this area!"

It's pretty much a red flag, and to (not) focus on that area really, the one they say you should not concentrate upon, focus on their 'agenda' as to what is important to women's liberation.

Patriarchy is founded upon reversals. So when one of their representatives (MRAs, libfems) says "don't go there!" you know damned well, you had better be there.

OP posts:
rosylea · 22/05/2018 10:40

OP, I find it quite ironic that you have a thread about deflection and mention dumping, when you've done exactly that on the other thread!

LaSqrrl · 22/05/2018 10:45

Rosy, did I tell you to focus on X when you should have focused on Y?
Or did I actually say "why the hell did you bring up Y when we were talking about X?"

Food for thought Rosy, food for thought.

OP posts:
Pratchet · 22/05/2018 10:46

And there we have it

QuentinSummers · 22/05/2018 11:27
Grin
rosylea · 22/05/2018 11:32

And there we have it. Yes, perfect example from OP on another thread, there for all to see in black and white. Deflection and dumping. And as she said herself "an anti feminist act"

rosylea · 22/05/2018 11:34

Food for thought indeed OP.

HotRocker · 22/05/2018 11:41

Can we have a glossary thread please?
I’m getting to grips with some of these terms but others go completely over my head. It would be interesting to know what they are so that people can recognise them, but also so they/I can avoid falling into those traps.
Debating is a learned skill and the more people who can recognise these techniques the better at it they will be.
Anyway sorry for dumping/deflecting or whatever on this thread. Just a thought.

rosylea · 22/05/2018 11:59

Don't want to derail this thread so OP, would you like to come back to the other one and explain your earlier comment please? Think that's reasonable don't you, considering I've already asked you on there twice?

LaSqrrl · 22/05/2018 12:04

rosy have replied to you on the other thread, after going back and re-reading. I hope that now clarifies it for you.

Having a go at me, on this thread, rather than the other thread, well, just really bad form.

OP posts:
LaSqrrl · 22/05/2018 12:06

I’m getting to grips with some of these terms but others go completely over my head. It would be interesting to know what they are so that people can recognise them, but also so they/I can avoid falling into those traps.

Just experience Hot. No magical formula really, just that we have been to this rodeo before...

OP posts:
rosylea · 22/05/2018 12:10

Debating is a learned skill and the more people who can recognise these techniques the better at it they will be. Well said, HotRocker. Dumping is when you make a random comment then just leave, without explaining or following it up. Yes a glossary would be useful.

Bowlofbabelfish · 22/05/2018 12:11

It all comes back to the fact that a woman saying NO is seen as a start point in a negotiation.

That convo about the toilets upthread should go:

We want in to women’s toilets
No.
But what are you going to do about it?
Nothing. We said no. Find your own solution

Instead it deteriorated into endless ‘but would you accept?’ ‘What aboit’ ‘What if we put baskets of sanpro in?’

And all that wasted time and energy when what we mean is NO

Pratchet · 22/05/2018 12:14

All of that, all of what bowl said, the whole lot. That is IT.

LangCleg · 22/05/2018 12:18

No is a complete sentence.

LaSqrrl · 22/05/2018 12:18

Rosy, for goodness sakes, give it up. That is NOT what 'dumping' meant within the context.

It meant 'dumping responsibility upon'. It did NOT mean seagulling. FFS.

OP posts:
AngryAttackKittens · 22/05/2018 12:19

Yep. Refusing to engage in the derail is a start. What if they put baskets of sanpro in? Irrelevant, since we already said no. But what if that hurts a male person's feelings? Again, not our circus, not our monkeys.

Bowlofbabelfish · 22/05/2018 12:29

Let’s try it then? I know there are a few posters (naming no names) who really do push the constant ‘but what if we... would you accept... what about?’ Stuff.

Channelling Grange Hill, lets just say no.

Rufustheyawningreindeer · 22/05/2018 12:30

The Zammo effect

BeyondPink · 22/05/2018 12:36

Marking my place here too. Busy day today, but I will be back Grin

HotRocker · 22/05/2018 15:23

Ah, I was seagulling then, although I am back now.
There you go, I’ve learnt another one.

R0wantrees · 22/05/2018 19:07

I recently came across the term 'Nut picking'
"The practice of sifting through the comments of blogs, email threads, discussion groups and other user generated content in an attempt find choice quotes proving that the advocates for or against a particular political opinion are unreasonable, uninformed extremists."

Seemed familiar.

AssignedPuuurfectAtBirth · 22/05/2018 19:28

This board has been a fucking education in debate techniques, that's for sure

thebewilderness · 22/05/2018 19:42

When it seems to be the more links to random publications the less bright someone is

I think that is the appeal to authority logical fallacy tactic perfected by the JW tracts that constantly cite scripture that has no relationship to the assertions made.
I am finding that the same people who do it regularly accuse others of logical fallacies. It is obvious they know what they are doing and are having a laugh at the expense of anyone who engages with them.

thebewilderness · 22/05/2018 19:49

Reading and understanding the use of logical fallacies really helps.
The books Why Does He DO That and The Gift of Fear describe some of the patterns that you can learn to recognize.
All people do this sort of thing so it is not good to assume intent when someone runs in the room and throws something outrageous on the table. They might just be upset. It is when the behavior is repeated that the patterns emerge.

Bowlofbabelfish · 22/05/2018 19:59

This is quite good too.

www.amazon.com/Bad-Thoughts-Guide-Clear-Thinking/dp/0954325532?tag=mumsnetforum-21