Anti-Feminist Anger

[Ser Reptitious]

Tempra,

It can be as simple as denouncing that conduct. Contrast that to the "deny, deny, deny" approach espoused above.

I double-checked the thread but I haven't found any evidence of "deny, deny, deny". Could you perhaps pin-point which post(s) you are referencing? Thanks.

[Trebla]

Miss the forest for the trees much?

And that will help the image of feminists. :)

I agree with her and and I'm 100% man, bro! :lol:

It does seem that the Anti-Feminist movement seems quite the same. Harkening back to the time of Wally and the Beaver. To the better times, perhaps when women, blacks, greasers, etc. knew their place. :D

[MinDonner]

What I am saying though is that both parties are silly, because they're fighting over a trivial matter in the face of many things that are far from being trivial. Such as women making much less money than men in identical positions, that women are almost automatically awarded custody over men, that rape is marginalised, or even the fact that indoctrination into the traditionally male and female roles begin almost as soon as we are born what with the whole marketing concept of pink dolls for girls and blue cars for boys.

Yeah, you're right; no feminist worth her salt would ever bother worrying about any of those issues, much less all of them at once AND the fact that the Canadian anthem is sexist. Only men can multitask. Or something.

You do realise it's possible to campaign for more than one thing at a time, right?

[CelticKnight]

I'm personally not against the feminist movement. It's a great and warranted movement that was needed in society.

With all movements however, it's the extremists I don't particularly care for, and I'm sure that such is the case for many of the "anti-feminists" here. You know, the man-hating kind. I find them analogous to the PETA movement. Much like PETA, the inherent ideology within the movement is good, but their words, methods and actions are just so misguided and disingenuous that people won't react kindly to it. (And before someone tries to call me out on it, I'm not comparing feminism to PETA. I'm comparing the radical mindset of a small minority of feminists to that of PETA)

This obviously leads to false generalisations of the movement, people start hating feminists in general, all that crap. In other words, it only hurts the movement.

[MinDonner]

And that will help the image of feminists. :)

We don't hate all men, dude. Just you. :whip:

(hey, some of my best friends are men!)

[kungtotte]

Galactus, I'd say it's a symptom of people being dumbasses more than anything. Never attribute to malice that which you can attribute to stupidity.

But anyway, you're not really arguing with anything in my post. My position is that even bothering with the anthem in the first place is silly, because there's so much else that you could concern yourself with that will have a bigger impact on the world.

I don't care that the people defending the anthem are more silly than the people wanting to change it, once you cross the line into silly territory you're just plain silly. In other words, it doesn't matter that the next guy is sillier than you, you're both sillier than me.

ETA because I type too slow and people reply too fast.

Yeah, you're right; no feminist worth her salt would ever bother worrying about any of those issues, much less all of them at once AND the fact that the Canadian anthem is sexist. Only men can multitask. Or something.

You do realise it's possible to campaign for more than one thing at a time, right?

Women can multitask just fine. I just wish those tasks were all of greater magnitude than a borderline sexist line in the Canadian national anthem.

[Galactus]

Galactus, I'd say it's a symptom of people being dumbasses more than anything. Never attribute to malice that which you can attribute to stupidity.

But anyway, you're not really arguing with anything in my post. My position is that even bothering with the anthem in the first place is silly, because there's so much else that you could concern yourself with that will have a bigger impact on the world.

I don't care that the people defending the anthem are more silly than the people wanting to change it, once you cross the line into silly territory you're just plain silly. In other words, it doesn't matter that the next guy is sillier than you, you're both sillier than me.

ETA because I type too slow and people reply too fast.

Women can multitask just fine. I just wish those tasks were all of greater magnitude than a borderline sexist line in the Canadian national anthem.

But the point is, changing the national anthem while making a miniscule difference is one that is *easy to make*. Rome was not built in a day, every journey starts with a single step, etc. etc.

In creating the debate it also allows for people to examine themselves and their prejudices a bit: *why* is it important to keep this little thing? What does that say about me? It allows a way of showing people how much they're still stuck in sexist modes of thinking without (no pun intended) thinking about it.

Now, obviously no one imagines that this will change the world overnight, or that there are not dozens of other things that are more important, but it's one part of the struggle to remake society; Namely force people to consider their own actions and patterns of thought.

Besides, this is the kind of stuff you might do on a lunch-break while bored. Not exactly the ost demanding of stuff either in resources or time.

[Guest Raidne]

So, on the idiotic, man-hating feminists thing.

To be fair, there are lesbian separatists who think that the presence of any men whatsoever denies them the lifestyle they want.

I guess you could call them man-haters, although it wouldn't even be entirely fair in those circumstances. But it's probably about as close as you're going to get.

But I don't see any idiotic feminists. Well, you know the Man Show? Remember that episode where they were getting women to sign a petition to end women's suffrage because women shouldn't suffer? If anyone calling themselves a feminists signed that petition, she's an idiotic feminist.

But when the women and athletes of Canada get together and say "hey, um, guys? Seeing as I just won this gold medal here and all, would it be cool if we changed the song you sang to me to refer to, you know, people like me, and not just sons? That'd be cool, since it's probably the best moment of my life and I just want it to be perfect," shame on you for calling that "silly."

Really. I hope you feel ashamed.

[TheLoneliestMonk]

I know anti-feminists' excuse for their disdain. It's the man hating feminists. The ones that call every man a misogynist just for being a man. The thing is, I've never fucking met this man hating feminist. I've seen her in old ass college movies like PCU, but in real life? Never. Not one. They rage against a staw woman.

[Eyelesbarrow]

Anger can be good sometimes. It fuels action. Why people use this against women, why it is automatically considered a negative thing, bothers me.

[Chaldanya]

Women can multitask just fine. I just wish those tasks were all of greater magnitude than a borderline sexist line in the Canadian national anthem.

Here's an idea why don't you do it then? You don't have to be a woman to campaign for equal rights, y'know. You could then feel even more superior when telling all of those silly, silly feminists they're doin' it wrong...

N

[kungtotte]

In creating the debate it also allows for people to examine themselves and their prejudices a bit: *why* is it important to keep this little thing? What does that say about me? It allows a way of showing people how much they're still stuck in sexist modes of thinking without (no pun intended) thinking about it.

I think you're crediting the protesters with too much intelligence. Anybody who resists a change like this is not likely to examine their own prejudices, and even if they did, the chances are slim that they would change their minds.

Besides, this is the kind of stuff you might do on a lunch-break while bored. Not exactly the ost demanding of stuff either in resources or time.

We've got two hot threads devoted to the subject on this forum alone, I'd say it takes some resources alright ;)

ETA

@TheLonliestMonk: Gudrun Schyman, a prominent feminist politician in Sweden, implied that all Swedish men were really just Talibans, it was just a matter of scale. She also proposed a special man tax, to be paid by all males to fund things like women's shelters and such, because apparently we're all guilty for the wrongdoings of the few. They might be few and far between, but the crazy man-hating feminist does exist.

Not that this excuses anti-feminist behaviour, of course.

@Silanah: the two times I've exercised the largest amount of power I can, voting for a political party, I voted for parties that explicitly promote equality. So while I don't campaign for equal rights as such, I am doing my part.

[TheLoneliestMonk]

I re-read the OP in the Does GRRM hate women thread, and almost want to take back my previous post in this thread.

[Datepalm]

I re-read the OP in the Does GRRM hate women thread, and almost want to take back my previous post in this thread.

hey, its fun times, that thread. To be honest, theres a lot of stereotype busting throughout the series, and you need to establish a few stereotypes for that. Catelyn is frumpy and Sansa is insipid and Cercei is an evil ice queen, and the only good women are dead or tomboys in the first chapters of GoT.

[Herr Fick]

it's sour grapes. feminism is generally de jure victorious in the west. the losers can't stand having lost.

I think that in ordinary cases this explanation suffices. Most anti-feministic sentiments (or positions critical of feminism) are not really well thought out, anyway. Some men are just angry and lack commitment as well as knowledge to seriously participate in the debate.

[Chaldanya]

@Silanah: the two times I've exercised the largest amount of power I can, voting for a political party, I voted for parties that explicitly promote equality. So while I don't campaign for equal rights as such, I am doing my part.

And so are they. I don't understand why that is so difficult to grasp for you. Is it just that you only want feminists to react in the ways that you do?

BTW this isn't about the national anthem per se, it's about disagreeing with you that there is only one way to campaign for equal rights.

You still haven't addressed the points that I raised upthread about exclusive language feeding into the inherent sexism in society (and vice versa) - we've got to break that cycle somewhere. And as a collorary you haven't addressed Raidne's point about a woman standing on the podium getting an olympic medal and singing a song that excludes her. Now maybe the latter part is for the other thread.

I'm really interested in communicating that we can campaign across large and small issues and have it all help and not place a value judgement on one or the other. It's the only way to make any kind of progress. The reflection I do on my own sexist behaviours and how to change that is just as much a feminist act as writing to my MP or donating to a pro-choice organisation.

N

[Shryke]

kungtotte,

See, this is exactly the thing: if it's such a trivial matter, then why not just change the bloody line? If it's all the same to you, but making the change seems to be important to someone else, why not just accomodate them?

Because if it's trivial, it's just change for change's sake and people don't tend to like that.

"If X is the way it's always been and it's not a big deal, why the fuck are you trying to change X? I grew up with X, spent my whole life with X and I don't feel like changing it to Y for a bunch of people whining about useless crap."

Essentially, wanting to change something trivial is not a neutral position.

And you could say that's what alot of this comes down to. Changing shit that most people see as harmless or trivial makes people think you are a whiner.

[MinDonner]

...and it's the definition of "harmless and trivial" where most of these arguments end up. Sexism isn't one big misogynist with a stick, forcing all women to stay in the kitchen; it's a zillion "harmless and trivial" things that add up to much the same effect. If we have to change them one at a time then so be it, but it would be so much easier if people wouldn't insist on sticking to an outdated status quo, simply because it doesn't affect them personally and it's easier. The status quo may be default, but that does not make it neutral.

[Shryke]

...and it's the definition of "harmless and trivial" where most of these arguments end up. Sexism isn't one big misogynist with a stick, forcing all women to stay in the kitchen; it's a zillion "harmless and trivial" things that add up to much the same effect. If we have to change them one at a time then so be it, but it would be so much easier if people wouldn't insist on sticking to an outdated status quo, simply because it doesn't affect them personally and it's easier. The status quo may be default, but that does not make it neutral.

When your definition of "harmless and trivial" differs from someone elses, why are you surprised when they think you are getting worked up over nothing?

[MinDonner]

Did I say I was surprised? But as others have said, the overreaction of people saying "NO THIS IS TRIVIAL SO STOP FUSSING OMG WHY ARE YOU MAKING SUCH A BIG DEAL" is usually way disproportionate to the original complaint, which then fuels the usual argument about privilege, wilful blindness, etc etc etc.... if it's so damn trivial then shut up and make the change already!