Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[XXSockXX]

Not always. You seen the crap on the Disney channel lately?

ALSO DON'T ASK ME HOW I KNOW THIS AAAA SERIOUSLY I DON'T WATCH THAT

This is hilarious.

[Neonivek]

These days, the extremist fringes of feminism are mostly unheard, aren't violent, and have very little power.  Most opposition to feminism isn't even directed at them.  It's directed at "straw feminists", entities of pure speculation and slippery slope arguments.

Ohh?

"You cannot be sexist against men because they are advantaged"

That wasn't a fake quote or said by some small nobody on like a small blog. It was by a professor of feminism said in a news article.

The Extremist fringes of anything isn't put far in the distance. For example: People who believe in the right to bear arms? There are many reasonable ones and many of the opposing statistics about weapon use is flat out untrue or misleading (such as the 50% chance you will hit a family member? fabricated from another statistic)... Who gets on the news? "We need our guns to protect ourselves from the Obama administration!"

It is just that the extremist fringes are never exactly the same as the Strawman.

[Sheb]

Honestly, I think a large part of the feminazis (I'm going to keep using it for the "bad feminists".) exposure come not from the media (I don't remember hearing much abut feminisn on the medias to be honest) but from people looking for an excuse to ignore feminism. It's the same way conservative nuts gets lots of exposure from the Daily Show.

[Neonivek]

The first type is how they are generally seen Greatorder but no.

First type also want equal rights, but whose views on how to achieve this, the current state of men and women, who has a say, and what is and isn't acceptable are extreme.

Honestly, I think a large part of the feminazis (I'm going to keep using it for the "bad feminists".) exposure come not from the media (I don't remember hearing much abut feminisn on the medias to be honest) but from people looking for an excuse to ignore feminism. It's the same way conservative nuts gets lots of exposure from the Daily Show.

I think a lot of it is from schooling when people are first developing their views on feminism but are ultimately very limited.

So when people become adults but they still remember that very early and flawed version of it (as well as people who retain it).

Though as I said earlier, I am not talking about the fake strawman feminism...

[Reelya]

Really, there are a large number of groups, with overlapping members, interests, aims. Some are labeled feminist, but are not really or solely within the feminist movement, and could be said to be biased in one way or another. One area is what could be called the "domestic violence industry", these are writers who push a status-quo version of what domestic violence is - that it's 100% men hurting women, caused by male power, and thus the solution is these re-education programs for men that have been shown to be ineffective, and they *actively* campaign against effective treatment programs that have different assumptions, because that is seen as an attack on their precious "theory".

Some evidence is in this article, below. It shows a broad symmetry in Partner violence rates in bulk studies over the last 30 years, and illustrates actual examples of how that raw data is then doctored to fit the "only men are violent" party line.

Written not by some MRA. But by a PhD in psychology who basically wrote the book on domestic violence back in the 1970's. Because he doesn't toe the party line, he's been labeled with all sort of baseless smear attacks, like that he's a wifebeater and stuff. Neat the end of the article he lists some smear attacks launched against himself, and other colleagues both male or female, for even daring to publish raw data that doesn't fit a political agenda. So, existing evidence is either distorted or selective ignored, and many of those who continue to do the basic research free of an agenda find themselves self-censoring because they fear these reputation-destroying witch hunts.
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/V71-Straus_Thirty-Years-Denying-Evidence-PV_10.pdf

Not making things up, or straw men. The above article illustrates longstanding, widespread and systematic doctoring of research to fit a feminist party line of domestic violence.

[Neonivek]

Mind you Reelya, doctoring statistics, facts, and history in order to benefit a certain idea. I even have an article, one that used to be the go to, that is entirely about how doctoring history is not only just but something you should be doing because it gives a country direction (it isn't a feminist article but it shows where this idea of "To benefit us now, we are allowed to alter facts to suit our benefit")

Though even within feminism is this issue well known. Though the two parties seem to be
1) We shouldn't need to lie in order to benefit feminism
and
2) feminism is a force for good, as such all the fudging is a necessary evil.

Mind you this is a common viewpoint for anything. Whether the message is more important then the truth, or whether lying for the message only hurts it. (and dear goodness is history taught in elementary and highschool extremely revisionist)

Also there is a cool lecture about feminism and this topic. I wish I bookmarked it because it is pretty interesting. The feminist who does the lecture actually wrote the authors of a book in order to change a few incorrect facts and statistics but they refused to.

[Sheb]

'As soon as men decide that all means are permitted to fight an evil, then their good becomes indistinguishable from the evil that they set out to destroy.'

Doesn't apply to women, because of patriarchate. Check your privilege!

[Neonivek]

Also, by fudging the results, does that mean that some men might not get the help they need if they're in an abusive relationship?

Yes that has happened.

For example it has only been rather recently that we have gotten men's shelters for abusive spouses, not because they didn't exist but because it was hard to convince people that they exist. and I've even heard news of men shelters being shut down because of the viewpoint that men cannot be abused.

You COULD also point to the reasons why men don't report being abused... but that would get complex.

[Sheb]

Thanks for posting that article, it's interesting read. I would have assumed that the prevalent views that domestic violence if mostly men assaulting women would hold.

[XXSockXX]

Also, by fudging the results, does that mean that some men might not get the help they need if they're in an abusive relationship?

Yes that has happened.

For example it has only been rather recently that we have gotten men's shelters for abusive spouses... and I've even heard news of men shelters being shut down because of the viewpoint that men cannot be abused.

You COULD also point to the reasons why men don't report being abused... but that would get complex.

But it is a complex issue, so simplifying does not help.

Domestic violence against women was barely seen as an issue only a few decades ago, so with that perspective complaining about a lack of men's shelters seems a bit silly. Not as silly as complaining about a lack of strong male characters on the Cartoon Princess Channel of course.

Actually the whole raging against fringe feminists seems a bit odd to me. Outside of angry internet debates, what influence do they have in reality? None I think. Most feminists are not like that, not all women are even feminists, so what's the big deal?

[Frumple]

Also, by fudging the results, does that mean that some men might not get the help they need if they're in an abusive relationship?

Yes that has happened.

For example it has only been rather recently that we have gotten men's shelters for abusive spouses, not because they didn't exist but because it was hard to convince people that they exist. and I've even heard news of men shelters being shut down because of the viewpoint that men cannot be abused.

You COULD also point to the reasons why men don't report being abused... but that would get complex.

Sweet hell neo, breaking the social perspective that men can't be abused has been one of the notable things feminism has been pushing toward. It's... you're twisting something to be close to the exact opposite of what it is. It's not (to any degree worth mentioning) feminist perspectives that have been putting forth the bullshit that men are not abuse victims. That nonsense is part of the exact gender role malarky the movement in general has been working to tear down. You can pretty much guarantee that without the feminist movement there would be even less support for male abuse victims -- prior to such things the possibility was barely even discussed, much less actual support structure (shelters, etc.) brought into existence.

[Reelya]

to be honest, that's why I wrote "domestic violence industry". if you look at whose pushing back at these contrary views, a lot of it comes not from grassroots feminists, or even young feminist scholars, but from older people who wrote all the textbooks on the subject. So, it's not just "feminists" though those people may publicaly identify as feminists - but they're also financially and professionally linked to the status-quo views. So, I view this as akin to those old-guard scientists who reject some new research because it discredits their old work.

Neonivek: are you perhaps referring to Christina Hoff Sommers' lecture. Because she's written quite extensively on this and related matters. There's also this:
http://freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013/09/04/the-startling-facts-on-female-sexual-aggression/
Which collates all the studies on female sexual aggression. It gives figures like 43% of college-age women in studies admit using coercion, intoxication or threats/violence to secure sex with men. That's not much different to male behavior in that respect, but we only ever hear the stat for men acting like this. So, we normally only hear the "bad behavior" from one side of the fence, without giving it a context. Saying "40% of men act like this, therefore they were indoctrinated by the patriarchy" doesn't hold up if you have another study showing 40% of women also acting in a similar fashion.

[Neonivek]

Sweet hell neo, breaking the social perspective that men can't be abused has been one of the notable things feminism has been pushing toward

Did I say feminists shut down these men's shelters? No...

I only said that the fudging certainly didn't help.

[Frumple]

Misinterpreted, then. My bad.

[Neonivek]

Misinterpreted, then. My bad.

No problem.

You can pretty much guarantee that without the feminist movement there would be even less support for male abuse victims

I'd believe it. Though not so much because feminism is actively tearing down male stereotypes, but because feminism begs the question on what gender stereotypes and values are real.