>
 |
| An Imaginary Feminist in action. |
There’s a great post up on The Pervocracy inspired by, well, some of the more lovable characters who frequent the comments section on this little blog – our resident antifeminists. As Holly notes, the feminists posting here devote much of their time (naturally enough) to arguing for feminism, while the MRA types, by contrast, tend to argue against an imaginary enemy that only bears a vague passing resemblance to actual feminism. Holly sets forth the tenets of this imaginary feminism, or IF, as she’s managed to glean them from the comments by MRA types here.
IF, she notes, is monolithic:
Anything said by anyone calling themselves a feminist can be assumed to be true of anyone else calling themselves a feminist. Some random thing Andrea Dworkin said in 1973 is tattooed on all IF’s chests backward so they can read it in the mirror. All IFs simultaneously subscribe to the beliefs of Valerie Solanas, Catharine McKinnon, Betty Dodson, Phyllis Schlafly, Twisty Faster, and that person who wrote those weird articles about Firefly.
Imaginary Feminists have no real grievances, are eager to take rights away from men, love shaming men, and are simultaneously sex-hating puritans and sex-obsessed sluts.
In other words, they are dastardly creatures indeed. If they really existed, I would oppose them too.
The post is hilarious and spot-on in its critiques. Well worth reading.
EDIT: Link fixed.
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
>"Ion said… I see my last comment's been deleted. I'm a bit surprised as I didn't think it was particularly offensive. Anyway, I guess Mr. Futrelle finally shows his true colors. So long, it's been fun."I thought you were flouncing off after your non-existent post got "deleted"
>"forweg said… "Why don't you just come out and say "I respect women as people just like me" right now? Then there's no quote hunt, it's on record! Seems easy enough."I respect no woman or man until they've earned my respect."So you don't respect yourself? Or do you need the question diagrammed? I love how mysogonists hide behind sociopathy as a defense.
>Ion: so long, it's been fun. Another lie.
>@ ForwegForget the "respect" part of it then. Are women people, just like you? Yes or no.
>I thought women were from Venus or Mars or made out of sugar and spice?I cannot keep up!
>I respect no woman or man until they've earned my respectI hate that line so very, very much. Either you don't understand the meaning of the word 'respect', or you enjoy being an ass to strangers. If you respect someone's opinion, if you care what they think about you… yeah, sure, that should be earned. But basic respect should be free to everyone, whether you know them or not, or even whether you like them or not. Basic respect means giving someone space to do their own thing (as long as they aren't tromping on someone else's space). It means giving someone the benefit of the doubt that they're a reasonable person. It means not crowding someone on the escalator or cutting someone off in traffic. It means recognizing that someone, even someone you don't know, is still a person with dignity and deserves to be treated that way.
>Unless you can provide some specific quotes to the objectionable things those feminists say or do, and explain why their contributions are more important than the academic works of well-respected scholars in the field, your whinging about "some feminists" is just self-serving sophistry and a transparent attempt to dodge the issue, which is your inability to understand and correctly use the word "patriarchy." (Sally)Well sally, being that I am pretty new to these discussions on the patriarchy and feminism sorry I am so slow on the uptake. But at least there are other people out there who have considered the ramifications of certain "loaded" terms like patriarchy and feminism. This article may not be the best out in webland but it does get right to the heart of the matter. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/10/kyriarchy-and-patriarchy#start-of-comments
>"The matter" being that men want to whine about how tough it is being on the top of the heap. "Patriarchy" is threatening because it's such an immense system that you have to actively fight it or you'll be part of it.
>The matter" being that men want to whine about how tough it is being on the top of the heap(ginmar)Again you prove my point. I am a man and trust me I am not on the top. Well, this morning I was briefly on top but then my wife switched position because she wanted to be on top. 😉
>You're not "slow on the uptake," T4T, you're a rank liar who refuses to understand things that are inconvenient to your worldview.
>So, you're saying that men haven't dominated history, law, justice, education, and everything since time began? And I love it when some dipshit acts like all that accumulated power doesn't have some effect on him. And, look! T4T wants us to know he's got a blow up doll. That surely adds to his credibility.
>Shorter T4T: I am not king of the world, therefore there is no such thing as patriarchy. Also: SEX!!! hur hur hur
>SallyNope, I just dont agree wholeheartedly with your worldview. In fact some of it is just not right. ginmarblow up doll? Dont you guys ever laugh?
>You see, T4T, womens' sexuality is regarded diffierently for women, so to make such a 'joke' amongst anything but extremely close friends would be risky indeed. You realy don't get it, do you? And you're not interested in learning, either. Sexuality for men is to be experienced in excess and boasted about; sexuality for women is to be restricted because women are still judged by how factory fresh they are. Privilege, you haz it.
>Seriously, Tit for Tat, no one gives a shit about your sex life or even the fact that you're married. You like to trot it out as often as you can, like you can convince us that because some woman thought you're worth marrying, you must not be all bad. Fine. You have a wife. Good for you. You sleep with her. Good for you. We don't care.
>ginmarNope, you dont get it. My wife is French, their joking tends to be more descriptive and laid back( you should have seen the quebecois women on saturday). Culture's are different, some of us just dont take life too seriously.
>We don't care.(Lady Vic)I know, youve made that clear too. Do you ever wonder why some dont care about your views?
>T4T, so far you have demonstrated that you are incapable of understanding my worldview sufficiently to say with certainty whether you agree with it for not. For starters, you insist on using your own personal definition of "patriarchy" that only MRA type dudes use–you know, the definition that says "Patriarchy = all men evil, all women good." You need to get to the first step of accurately understanding where another person is coming from before you can actually agree or disagree with what she is saying. So far you haven't taken that first step. I believe that this is because you are not arguing in good faith. Feel free to prove me wrong.
>If he has to tell us, well….Yeah.
>My views or my sex life?I'd be thrilled if more people cared less about my sex life, I really would. Good thing that my views aren't the same thing as my sex life.
>SallyDid you even read the link?
>LadyCan you say humour?? I know the old saying, when in public dont discuss or joke about religion, politics or sex. I find them all quite illuminating though, obviously you dont.
>It wasn't funny, it was using your wife to make a cheap shot at the rest of us.
>Ion, your post was caught by the spam filter; I don't know why. I've taken it out of the spam filter and it's up now.
>Then tell me its not funny, rather than getting nasty. The joke was about the reference to me being on the top because I am a man, or did you miss that?