What are the central tenets of Straw Feminism? (No, seriously, I’m asking.)

You claimed we were out to steal your identity. You refer to women as “damaged goods”. Just take your stupidty and GO AWAY. Or are you the sort of creepy kid in the schoolground who just likes to follow someone around to annoy them? What sort of pathetic thrill are you getting out of this?

The words I used could have been better chosen, yes, I’ll admit that much. I can’t change those words, and that is part of the reason I find this ridiculous.

Apologies: Still doing them wrong.

(Also: why is it so hard for people like this to even come close? “I could have chosen better words.” That’s like half-way to an apology right there. Dl’d have to drop the “As the person who fucked up in the first place, I find everything since then ridiculous,” which would hurt so bad, I’m sure.)

I like the Davids writing. I explained that already.

As for calling all women damaged goods.. Look back again at that post. I believe I said that particular woman was, because she had a history of being abused. You do not get over being abused overnight 😐 seriously. Anyone who has been abused, or has dealt with people who have been abused, knows this.

Some people just like attention. Even (especially?) when it’s negative.

There may be a correlation between those people and ones who use 2 dot ellipses and make faux apologies.

@DL

You can read David’s writing without commenting. Either you like the comments and want to participate, just can’t handle being told to go away or think that you are so special and awesome that your ideas just have to be included. If it is the first, we won’t like you back when you pull shit like you have been pulling. If it is the second, suck it up and you should probably work on that in general (it’ll happen again). If it is the third, you are wrong as evidenced by your use if “damaged goods” to refer to women (that misogyny is a dime a dozen) and your contributions to this thread (both the repetitiveness and now, the inability to apologize or even recognize a mistake are also white common).

Just stop. You won’t get the last word in this and it will come up the next time you comment.

That’s it, furry cuties. I got up. They glared at me for a few seconds and then spooned with each other, forgetting me entirely.

CATS.

I actually think it’s different; attention hogs, IMO, are usually the ones who come in and say ridiculous inflammatory obviously-untrue shit, like Pell or whoever.

DL and Ruby are I think a different sort, the sort who for whatever reason want to pretend that we’re their friends. So they usually just pop in with “Great post, David! Keep it up!” and try to look like any other harmless infrequent poster, and if you ignore them then more and more people think they are harmless infrequent posters, which is what they want.

“I like the Davids writing.”

THE DAVIDS

THEY ARE LEGION

@The Kittehs’

I had a lot of typos too. I blame the second glass of wine. (The first and third were good, but that second one was a troublemaker.) 🙂

Some Gal – we all have typos. They’re all fodder for a laugh (whether by the writer or reader). 😉

Still think The Davids is an idea to run with. It’s like that time there were questions in the house about whether David is actually made up of multiple cats.

LOL yes, that’s just perfect!

I wish I could remember which thread the David-multiple-cats thing was in. I trawl through so many old ones it could be anywhere.

Straw feminism makes people ugly.
Straw feminists are ugly.
Ugly people become straw feminists.
–>
Straw feminists are subhuman, deviant scum.
–>
Straw Feminism, The Ideology of Subhuman Deviant Scum, wants to “hook you up with an uggo” and “give women the right of cock carosoulling” [verb confusion. To carousel? Carouselling?] and is the ideological kool-aid of angry manboobz.
–>
Why won’t anyone sleep with me? I’m a nice person! Bitch!
—

There’s some Venn Diagram overlap if you draw those out – I’m still not sure if Mr. ManSplain or Dr. Derogatory have fully worked out their Greater Manjaw theory – but the basis seems to be that only ugly people can become straw feminists, or that in any way finding anything about feminism will slowly and irrevocably (like a hideous memetic virus) alter your very body to become a puss infested, monstrosity. I think the word “Landwhale” comes up a lot, but I can’t find the source any more. If anyone could get me the link to “Hyperbole and Exaggeration in Codifying Commodities Exchanges Based on A Very Skewed Value System”, 2012, Fractal Wrong Press, Myass University., I’d be really glad.

It’s actually a really weird insult to leverage, because MRA’s jump straight beyond arguing social politics or philosophy or conscious thoughts and boil it all down to some miasma of: “Hey! You’re a hideous, deformed manboob slaving away to destroy us Pure, Pretty People”. As if being beautiful was somehow some sort of… currency… one should tender to best ability and there was some kind of… market place almost wherein you could exchange this… sex appeal? Yes!… towards gaining some sort of advantage. Because surely market dynamics apply to interpersonal relationships, theoretical basis what now misapplied rational economic theory wossname?

Sigh.
The only thing that one does is show that the person making the argument is operating under a very, very strange value system. Note that the primary straw always seems to be that people are ugly, not that they’re feminists, but because they’re ugly they must be feminists so they must be wrong so only beautiful women have any value because being ugly discredits your ideas because thinking or perspective or understanding or empathy or emotion or social regard or obligation or duty or thought or belief is apparently alien motivations to the MRA mind.
Which explains a lot, I guess. And it is sad.