Feminism or death?

“Does every feminist have to fix every problem in the world?”

Yes, because we are ladies and that means that we are everyone’s mommy.

Toysoldier:
I didn’t take in consideration that you could think that I was referring to the abuse you experienced, since in the subsequent posts I usually acknowledged that the abuse happened. I am sincerely sorry for making you think that I didn’t believe you in that regard, so my apologies.
I will try to be more clear in the future.

The rest stands, however.

Listen, I understand that you are not very fond of feminism because of what happened. It’s far from me to expect you to become a feminist, or even pro-feminist.
All I want is that you stop trying to argue that feminism supports child abuse. I know you keep claiming you never did that, and quoting your own words over and over gets really tedious. So, I will ask you to choose your words more carefully next time, since many people on here also took them to mean that you think feminism supports abuse.

I also think it is sad that you still keep defending the MRAs, and saying they are anti-violence. See, while still unacceptable, the problem is not even so much that some of them spew violent rhetoric. It’s the fact that they rarely, if ever, get called out on it by other MRAs.
So yes, it may be only a few (though looking at all the quotes archived on this blog, they are still too many) who actually voice their hateful and violent opinions, but the fact that there is barely any disagreement definitely shows that apparently, their opinions aren’t exactly unpopular. Other’s just don’t actively voice them.
This isn’t factoring in that there are MRAs who tried to defend the actions of people like Breivik…

See, this is the difference. In feminist circles, people usually call out others if they say problematic things. The Mary Daly thing on Shakesville is a good example.

I just saw an episode of “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” season 7 episode 3. It seems relevant to this discussion. Any opinions about “Toddler’s in Tiaras” type pagentry?

darksidecat and Ami Angelwings: Do not equivocate. The very notion that there is class privilege assumes that there is an average group experience.

Flib: You are arguing in bad faith. You appear to have no intention of considering anything I put forward short of me agreeing with your views, yet you present yourself as being open to my arguments. Resorting to ad hominems and insults only proves your bad faith position.

David Futrelle: Yes, no men’s rights activists  talk about race-based sentencing disparities. Granted, it is not something they regularly discuss,  but they do acknowledge it as a genuine problem, compared to feminists rarely mentioning gender-based sentencing disparities at all and writing off the problem as just another part of “patriarchy”.

CassandraSays: I see feminists are still attempting to claim their strawman arguments are my actual positions. And I see feminists, who claim to care so much about male survivors, are still using my experiences to insult and mock me. Of course, the feminist brand of crazy is at least somewhat understandable as a result of their misandry and love of irrational conspiracy theories. So why, oh why, would I not want to be in such esteemed company?

comrade svilova: Any easy fix would be for feminists to stop claiming that feminism is for everyone. Then no one would assume feminists have a responsibly to address — wait for it — everyone’s problems. If feminists are really only concerned with women, they should just admit that and move on.

Kollege Messerschmitt: As I noted before, I do not care if feminists to believe me, so your disingenuous apology is unnecessary. However, let this be a lesson to insult people just because you disagree with someone. I am not very fond of feminism because it is a flawed ideology based largely on narrow-minded views, ill-explained, poorly constructed theories, (ironically) sexist rhetoric, and hypocrisy. My childhood experiences have nothing to do with that. What I would like you to do is stop misrepresenting my words. I said feminism can cause people to become hateful and violent, and there is plenty of proof of that. I understand that you disagree, feminists need to lose their bad habit of resorting to strawman arguments when someone says something they do not like. I take no offense to them doing it, although I do find it comical and rather pathetic. Both feminists and men’s activists have a bad habit of letting egregious comments slide, but only feminists deny their side ever makes such comments. I dislike gross misrepresentation, and to claim a group does something it does not do will prompt my criticism of that argument, hence the reason I took feminists to task.  As for feminists calling each other out, funny how it rarely includes calling out misandry.

Toysoldier: I am not arguing in bad faith. You have changed the nature of the dispute multiple times in order to defend your shaky illogical position. I have called you out on how you don’t have the knowledge, multiple times. You have not responded to that and continued to act like you do. Yet you have proven no mastery of the knowledge, and have in fact shown where you lack in knowing anything about feminist theory by attempting to create statements about theory that are not even in the theory. For instance, your knowledge on privilege and intersection is not correct because you keep using dictionary definitions, not sociological ones.

When I say stop pretending like you know what you are saying, that is because you are pretending. It’s not bad faith to call someone out when they are, at best, specifically misinformed, and at worst, lying to make points that don’t work. The fact that we have to go back and forth like this 5 times is further indication that you have not actually studied any sociological theory or basic modeling, feminist or not. Go back, and read. That’s what I have been requesting.

Again, there aren’t universals, the modeling looks at a systemic level that is empirically proven. You are the one who keeps trying to say it makes universal statements which is demonstrably false. You have been given applied studies that utilize intersection not in anyway the manner that you have described it. You have also lied about the history of where intersectionality comes from (“It’s a false notion to deal with my made up logic errors of previous theory, because feminism is bad, and thus it makes the later theory bad” is the gist of your argument).

This is why I am not holding your opinions valid. If you could get your basic premises correct, and your basic logic correct, then I might be arguing in bad faith. But I’m not arguing in bad faith when you have demonstrated a lack of actual knowledge. You do not hold any validity in the statements you make because they are factually incorrect, be it through your lack of knowledge or intentional distortion. I’m going to further believe it is the latter of the two because you keep insisting your opinion holds some measure of validity while refusing to actually engage with how you are incorrect.

So, don’t try and change the argument to how I am insulting you. I’m insulting you on top of pointing out where you have been wrong. You haven’t responded to where you are wrong, your only focusing on the insults. Shows where your ability with knowledge is.

I just saw an episode of “It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,” season 7 episode 3. It seems relevant to this discussion. Any opinions about “Toddler’s in Tiaras” type pagentry?

butterfliesandwheels.org/2011/its-all-about-a-beautiful-dress/

Kollege Kat: If I were making the issue of child abuse “all about me” I would have dragged you through the lurid details of the abuse my mother set me up for. But as a CRA (Children’s Rights Advocate) you quickly find out there’s always someone whose had it worse. Much worse. Like the nine-year old girl who was sold into prostitution by her mother.

The woman made the child stay in a tent in the backyard and pandered her from the kitchen. Ironically, she was caught because one of the “John’s” turned her in. The mother had led him to believe he would be meeting a teenage girl. When he found the terrified child, trembling in fear, he called the cops.

Also if I directed my efforts of child abuse awareness to my personal experiences, I open myself up to having those deep hurtful feelings mitigated and demeaned.

@ Toysoldier: And I see feminists, who claim to care so much about male survivors, are still using my experiences to insult and mock me.

@ Toysoldier: You twice used my experiences to insult me. Back on page 3 you called me “a liar and coward”. On page 4 you claimed to believe me, and then stated, “But I still think you are full of shit.”

I caught those comments of your’s too Kollege Kat, as well as many others.

@ Kollege Kat: “It reminds me of the “well, where’s my white history month/straight pride parade/men’s studies, huh?” folks.”

The same can be said about child abuse. Where’s my child abuse awareness month/CRA activism/parenting studies? I can add, where’s the NFL with black armbands and white ribbons? They wore pink for breast cancer. Where’s the activism in the streets like the walk a mile in her shoes campaigns? What’s the “Women Against Child Abuse” equivalent to Men Against Violence and Men Against Rape. Even those are shill feminist organizations.

@ Comrade Svilova: “Does every feminist have to fix every problem in the world?”

@ Amused: “Yes. And not only that, but every feminist has to fix every problem in the world that affects men before addressing any problem that affects women.”

The VAWA, the White House Council for Women & Girls, the NFL wearing pink… that’s all feminists address are “problems that effect women.”

I’m not asking feminists “to fix every problem in the world.” But it’s about time they start addressing the problems created by women. Like the documented increase in maternal abuse and murder.

I believe darksidecat, who is knowledgeable and has offered great statistics, would not disagree there has been a substantial increase in the past quarter century.

“Holy shit, I just found a german MRA-page on the first page of google results for Mary Daly that says “Mary Daly is not a human being, but a woman” (“Mary Daly ist kein Mensch. Sondern eine Frau.”).”

…

Yikes.

But it’s about time they start addressing the problems created by women. Like the documented increase in maternal abuse and murder.

I would address it by making unpaid paternity a prerequisite to getting custody in divorce. If you didn’t take a hit to your career to care for your kid, while your partner did, then you are not entitled to custody, period. Not even shared custody. If you expected your wife to keep the baby from being a nuisance to you during the marriage then guess what? She’ll get the privilege of keeping that baby out of your presence after the marriage. And I would make failure to spend a certain minimum amount of time with one’s child a ground for losing parental rights. Maybe then more men (and especially men like you) will do their fair share in actually raising children, instead of just pontificating to them about how the bitches are shit.

@Toysoldier, I do feel sorry what happened to you, but how you’re going about the issues that hurt men (and strawmanning feminism in the process) doesn’t do jack shit for them, to be honest.

I was once sexually abused, too, only it was in a situation where (sadly) most of the mainstream wouldn’t even call “abuse”, just “boys will be boys” and “right on, playa”. I was angry about it for a while, too, and I directed a lot of that anger at myself. But I took the time to realize the nuances of my situation, to not be ashamed of myself and to actually LOOK AT THE ISSUE OF CHILD ABUSE as opposed to using it to say, “See, women/feminists are totally selfish pieces of filth. Look at this situation that happened to me once.”

Granted, what happened to me is different from what happened to you, and again, I recognize how hurt you are by that and I emphasize…but how you’re going about it, how you’re defending MRAs (the very people who would, in most situations, look at your pain and say, “Eh, get over it. You’re a man, boy!”, as evidenced by Roosh’s bullshit), and saying that feminists aren’t working hard to fix not just women’s problems, but HUMAN problems (despite lots of evidence to the contrary)…really, man, it’s no wonder that people aren’t taking what you say seriously.

The same thing goes for you, RevSpinnaker. You’re going on and on about how feminists condone child abuse, but you’re not doing shit for anyone who has been abused other than whine about how other people aren’t doing it. I not saying that one HAS to do some action towards fixing child abuse 24/7 (I’m just a victim at this point, too, and while I AM doing the research, I’ve yet to do some community work). Either recognize the reality of the situation, stop blaming feminists for anything, and take some steps to actually HELP children or abuse victims. Otherwise, I have no choice but to not take you seriously and see you as yet another guy who likes to pin the world’s problems on other people so that they can be rid of the responsibility of actually being right about those problems.

Had to get that out of my chest. I know I discussed my being abused with folks on the Manboobz fourms, before, but since Toysolider and RevSpinnaker seem to be repeating their bullshit from time to time, I had to share my take on the whole thing. Hopefully, they’ll listen to me.

Rev:

I’m not asking feminists “to fix every problem in the world.” But it’s about time they start addressing the problems created by women.

This argument is associational rather than sensible.

Feminism is, broadly speaking, a pro-equality movement. Further, it’s a pro-equality movement primarily concerned with inequalities that harm women. (this is my definition; others may differ.)

Now, since inequalities are bad (generally speaking), feminism is working, as best as it is able in accord with its clearest understanding, to fight only things that are bad. However, that doesn’t mean that all things that are bad are legitimate targets of feminism. Toe-stubbing is bad; but that doesn’t mean feminism should address it, for example.

For a bad thing to be a reasonable target of feminism as a movement,* it has to be 1) an inequality, which 2) harms women.

So no, “problems created by women” are a very silly target for feminism. First, such problems need not be inequalities. If only women were the perpetrators of a certain sort of injustice that harmed everyone equally, that would be a problem, but not necessarily an inequality. A different sort of movement would be necessary to address it. Second, a problem created by women might not harm them; in fact, this is a central part of your claim. Feminism is not dishonest when it does not focus its attention on problems that do not particularly harm women. Instead, it is true to it its own mission.

In summary, feminism is not “the women police,” somehow morally responsible for everything that women do and everything that affects them. It is not! It is a legitimate movement, acting in accordance with its own principles, when it only focuses on a subset of problems (social inequalities targeting women). That doesn’t mean feminists as people are off the hook for perpetuating other problems, but it does make it very silly to require the movement to produce some good-faith amount of work on another problem.

Honestly, the only way your logic makes sense is if you know that feminism has something to do with women, and really nothing more about it. Please do correct me if I’ve misunderstood.

*rather than feminists as individuals, who may have many projects–including, notably, masculism, the (nascent) movement targeting inequalities that harm men or otherwise male people.

I believe darksidecat, who is knowledgeable and has offered great statistics, would not disagree there has been a substantial increase in the past quarter century.

Citation sorely needed. It is very difficult to get historical data about child abuse, in large part because many types of child abuse were not historically illegal (in addition, some types of physical abuse are not illegal in all states even now). Historically, children have been treated as property of their parents. It was not until the 1820s that it even became legal to remove abused children from the parent’s custody. States did not have to have any programs in place to prevent child abuse until 1958 (federal mandates for funding under the social security act). It was not until 1974 which the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act, that these were expanded to include things like non-intentional neglect and a wide variety of other issues (even then, it was not widespread until the 80s the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act). Finding detailed tracking of any crimes before this period is extremely difficult to impossible. Arguing that this crime has increased in the past half century is rather poorly supported when there is a lack of reporting to create accurate data from before that time period. Since the 1980s in the US, all violent crimes have decreased, the number of convictions compared to the population (the rate of offense) for murder of children, physical abuse, and sexual abuse have all declined significantly. Neglect is harder to track, because neglect that was not “willful and malicious” has rarely been prosecuted until very, very recently, and is prosecuted in uneven ways across the population. Still, I have not seen data which has solid historical statistics citing a dramatic increase in neglect in practice.

This question should go to NWO, MRAL, that peniopra dude (sp?) and the like, too.

Yeah, I really want to hear their reaction to taking their claim that there is an epidemic of mothers killing and maiming children to its logical conclusion. In fact, since the claim is that all women hurt all children, then it’s a national emergency, and the government should jump on it right now! For the good of the children, henceforth men of childbearing age should be ineligible for gainful employment, except in part-time secretarial positions. Men should also be ineligible for college education, except to major in Home-Making and Domestic Arts. It’s a harsh remedy, I know, but we must save the children!! Clearly, men belong in the home, caring for and protecting children from their perfidious mothers, and so our society should do everything it can to keep men there.

See how they like it when the shoe is on the other foot.

(yes, I am being sarcastic)