Equality, sexism, feminism, etc. *Read Mod Note in 1st Post**

old hippy

Buzz Killington the third wrote: »

Like I pretty much said in earlier posts, they shouted the loudest so they became the face of it. Nobody wants to dismiss the movement, but I think a lot of women want to remain separated from it.

And the commentators who shout the loudest; "feminazi" and so on - as a male, I'd like to be separated from that particular herd.

Muise...

Buzz Killington the third wrote: »

Like I pretty much said in earlier posts, they shouted the loudest so they became the face of it. Nobody wants to dismiss the movement, but I think a lot of women want to remain separated from it.

What frustrates some women on AH is that no woman on AH says things like "if you're not 100% with us you're 100% against us" or any of the extremist men-are-all-bastards or absurdist guff that gets people's backs up, yet we have to put up with being baited about it every time a thread like this starts.

And this one was started by a mod... Wonder how he'd feel if I strode into his non-drinkers forum with a thread entitled "Lighten up ye dryballs and have a drink for feck's sake"? Maybe the other mods would put a warning note about anti-non-drinkers and anti-drinkers bile in the first post?

(and no, this isn't a hive mind thing, it's facepalming metathreads on pm among some AH women every time this sh1te happens.)

e_e

old hippy wrote: »

And the commentators who shout the loudest; "feminazi" and so on - as a male, I'd like to be separated from that particular herd.

Yep, can't help but feel that these people have deep-seated issues with the opposite sex when they have to lower their opponents to the level of people who committed mass genocide. :pac:

Dave!

Muise... wrote: »

What frustrates some women on AH is that no woman on AH says things like "if you're not 100% with us you're 100% against us" or any of the extremist men-are-all-bastards or absurdist guff that gets people's backs up, yet we have to put up with being baited about it every time a thread like this starts.

And this one was started by a mod... Wonder how he'd feel if I strode into his non-drinkers forum with a thread entitled "Lighten up ye dryballs and have a drink for feck's sake"? Maybe the other mods would put a warning note about anti-non-drinkers and anti-drinkers bile in the first post?

(and no, this isn't a hive mind thing, it's facepalming metathreads on pm among some AH women every time this sh1te happens.)

Stop being so dramatic FFS. I don't care what "women on AH" are like—I'm raising questions about a broader societal issue, which I've given examples of. You can choose to participate or not. The AH mods can weed out the dumb comments—I've reported some myself.

I've been nothing but respectful and am trying to have an honest discussion about something that is on my mind, and you just keep posting sarky remarks about me. Close the thread and whinge elsewhere if my post is bothering you.

I'm sure you'd be banned if you posted that sh*te in the NDG forum. If I've broken some AH rules, then I'm sure that I'll be banned too, and the thread closed.

Bloody hell...

Vito Corleone

Links234 wrote: »

You don't need to get more women to play, they're already playing!

Nearly half of all gamers are women.

I find that very hard to believe.

GalwayGuy2

@Bluewolf.

Eh, I agree with most of what you said, but I do have an issue with one of your posts. Male game developers are threatened just as much as women are, but it's just not reported. I dunno, but that's just my IMO

@ee

B-but Anti-feminism doesn't equal anti-women

@Muise.

Yes, I agree people can write female characters. But people write based on what they read. IF they're reading all male protagonists then they're mind will automatically write a story with a male protagonist. Even people who deliberately subvert those tropes are, you know, deliberately going against their first thought.
It's kind of like the inundation of female characters in YA and the inundation of farm boys in fantasy.

I've gone off playing games now. I don't really have the patience for long, rather pointless dialogue Even though dragon age is a great story. And loadout screens.

I think I'll wait 'till I get a desktop.

Dravokivich

Vito Corleone wrote: »

I find that very hard to believe.

I've known many women through gaming over the last 10-12 years. it's not really that odd. It's just there's a huge stereotype around it being a laddish thing to do.

Muise...

Dave! wrote: »

Stop being so dramatic FFS. I don't care what "women on AH" are like—I'm raising questions about a broader societal issue, which I've given examples of. You can choose to participate or not. The AH mods can weed out the dumb comments—I've reported some myself.

I've been nothing but respectful and am trying to have an honest discussion about something that is on my mind, and you just keep posting sarky remarks about me. Close the thread and whinge elsewhere if my post is bothering you.

I'm sure you'd be banned if you posted that sh*te in the NDG forum. If I've broken some AH rules, then I'm sure that I'll be banned too, and the thread closed.

Bloody hell...

Methinks the mod doth protest too much...

I don't believe you about your "honest discussion", frankly, as any brief perusal of previous AH threads on feminism would have shown you what happens. You may be perfectly respectful as host of your gender-issues party, but you know full well what you're letting in the door. You even wrote it yourself in your OP: "I may be taking my life in my hands with this".

And if you want to actually get to grips with the "broader societal issue", you really should care what the women on AH are like. We are societal broads after all.

tritium

Muise... wrote: »

What frustrates some women on AH is that no woman on AH says things like "if you're not 100% with us you're 100% against us" or any of the extremist men-are-all-bastards or absurdist guff that gets people's backs up, yet we have to put up with being baited about it every time a thread like this starts.

And this one was started by a mod... Wonder how he'd feel if I strode into his non-drinkers forum with a thread entitled "Lighten up ye dryballs and have a drink for feck's sake"? Maybe the other mods would put a warning note about anti-non-drinkers and anti-drinkers bile in the first post?

(and no, this isn't a hive mind thing, it's facepalming metathreads on pm among some AH women every time this sh1te happens.)

Notwithstanding that I've *ahem* debated with a couple of posters on here who I would suspect of being fairly extreme or radical feminists in their views based on their approach to debate (if anyone is paranoid it was them then its likely it wasn't)...

While I appreciate this all in one pot stuff is depressing to be faced with I'm not sure that either side realises that its a two way street, both on AH and in wider forums. There tends to be the same small but vocal groups on both sides banging the same drum over and over.

I'm sure being told all feminists are crack heads over and over is galling. Believe me, being faced with the same patriarchy/ whataboutery/ rape culture/ check your privilege sh!te is no better. I guess the qualifier some would be a fairly decent consideration by both sides.

oak5548

How about we take this crap off after hours and go back to just having fun like we used to. This board has take a steep dive in the past year or so
but I do notice that this feminism war is popping up more frequently all over the internet recently, wrecking my head tbh. Didnt think after hours was the place to discuss it.

This is rarely an issue in reality and hardly ever discussed amongst the circle of friends and colleagues i know. The girls get along just fine and are treated equally. Men also experience sexist discrimination too you know. Seems to me like its mostly contained to keyboard warriers with too much time on their hands online, that dedicate their lives to being angry at this.

Have to agree with one post though: una mullally is a sexist pig against men

Muise...

tritium wrote: »

Notwithstanding that I've *ahem* debated with a couple of posters on here who I would suspect of being fairly extreme or radical feminists in their views based on their approach to debate (if anyone is paranoid it was them then its likely it wasn't)...

While I appreciate this all in one pot stuff is depressing to be faced with I'm not sure that either side realises that its a two way street, both on AH and in wider forums. There tends to be the same small but vocal groups on both sides banging the same drum over and over.

I'm sure being told all feminists are crack heads over and over is galling. Believe me, being faced with the same patriarchy/ whataboutery/ rape culture/ check your privilege sh!te is no better. I guess the qualifier some would be a fairly decent consideration by both sides.

indeed.

Tony EH

Jesus...

What just happened?

Dave!

Muise... wrote: »

Methinks the mod doth protest too much...

I don't believe you about your "honest discussion", frankly, as any brief perusal of previous AH threads on feminism would have shown you what happens. You may be perfectly respectful as host of your gender-issues party, but you know full well what you're letting in the door. You even wrote it yourself in your OP: "I may be taking my life in my hands with this".

And if you want to actually get to grips with the broader societal issue, you really should care what the women on AH are like. We are societal broads after all.

Actually I wrote "I may be taking my life in my hands with this", because I assumed I'd get a backlash from feminists disagreeing with me, like I would get if I shared it on Twitter. I've not read any previous AH threads on feminism AFAIR, and have no idea what way these threads generally go.

Anyways, if you want to doubt my sincerity then I'm not interested in dealing with you. Thankfully most people posting are being fairly reasonable, and not being total cnuts.

Muise...

Dave! wrote: »

Actually I wrote "I may be taking my life in my hands with this", because I assumed I'd get a backlash from feminists disagreeing with me, like I would get if I shared it on Twitter. I've not read any previous AH threads on feminism AFAIR, and have no idea what way these threads generally go.

Anyways, if you want to doubt my sincerity then I'm not interested in dealing with you. Thankfully most people posting are being fairly reasonable, and not being total cnuts.

Oooh, a mod just called me a total cnut. I have arrived!*


*by 'arrived', I mean anticipating a ban.

old hippy

The late, great, Doris Lessing

“Ideally, what should be said to every child, repeatedly, throughout his or her school life is something like this: 'You are in the process of being indoctrinated. We have not yet evolved a system of education that is not a system of indoctrination. We are sorry, but it is the best we can do.

What you are being taught here is an amalgam of current prejudice and the choices of this particular culture. The slightest look at history will show how impermanent these must be. You are being taught by people who have been able to accommodate themselves to a regime of thought laid down by their predecessors. It is a self-perpetuating system.

Those of you who are more robust and individual than others will be encouraged to leave and find ways of educating yourself — educating your own judgements. Those that stay must remember, always, and all the time, that they are being moulded and patterned to fit into the narrow and particular needs of this particular society.”

Jonny Blaze

The funny thing is that growing up I would have considered myself staunchly in favour of equality and perhaps even have called myself a feminist in terms of attitude or outlook, but the online dialogue surrounding the entire issue over the last few years has left me basically feeling confused and under attack because of my gender in a way that has dimmed my early enthusiasm for 'the cause'.

At this stage i'm just so tired of hearing about gender issues it just makes me tune out.

Women have it better than than they basically ever have, and that's not to say that there aren't areas in need of improvement, but on the whole equality, I would argue, has happened.

And that's a good thing.

But when you contrast that with the level of vitriolic proselytising that seems to accompany the discussion of gender issues today particularly from the 'pro-woman' (whatever that's supposed to mean) camp it just begs to be ignored and reviled.

Jester252

Gender quota for anything are damaging for both sexes.

Buzz Killington the third

Muise... wrote: »

Oooh, a mod just called me a total cnut. I have arrived!*

He didn't say that

I can't help notice how confrontational and defensive you're being. It doesn't help your argument really.

Dave!

Jonny Blaze wrote: »

The funny thing is that growing up I would have considered myself staunchly in favour of equality and perhaps even have called myself a feminist in terms of attitude or outlook, but the online dialogue surrounding the entire issue over the last few years has left me basically feeling confused and under attack because of my gender in a way that has dimmed my early enthusiasm for 'the cause'.

At this stage i'm just so tired of hearing about gender issues it just makes me tune out.

Women have it better than than they basically ever have, and that's not to say that there aren't areas in need of improvement, but on the whole equality, I would argue, has happened.

And that's a good thing.

But when you contrast that with the level of vitriolic proselytising that seems to accompany the discussion of gender issues today particularly from the 'pro-woman' (whatever that's supposed to mean) camp it just begs to be ignored and reviled.

That's generally my feelings on it too. I follow lots of interesting people on Twitter, many of whom would be feminists, and I'm more and more frequently thinking I should unfollow them, because some of the tweets are really aggressive and I do feel a bit under attack by them. And as I mentioned in the OP, I can't voice any disagreement or I'll be labelled a misogynist. But then I feel that if I do try to avoid exposing myself to these points/issues, then I'm in some way part of the problem.

There's a #NotAllMen hashtag floating around, and it's basically riffing on the men who have the temerity to respond to aggressive generalisations about how men treat women.

old hippy

Jonny Blaze wrote: »

Women have it better than than they basically ever have, and that's not to say that there aren't areas in need of improvement, but on the whole equality, I would argue, has happened.

On a global perspective I disagree. Mutilation, rape, not being allowed an education, domestic abuse - that seems about as far from equality as you can get.

Muise...

Buzz Killington the third wrote: »

He didn't say that

I can't help notice how confrontational and defensive you're being. It doesn't help your argument really.

You are absolutely right. He said some other people were not being total cnuts. My mistake. He loves my thoughts on his original and well-thought out thread really.

e_e

Dave! wrote: »

There's a #NotAllMen hashtag floating around, and it's basically riffing on the men who have the temerity to respond to aggressive generalisations about how men treat women.

I can somewhat understand why the "not all men" response is worthy of ridicule. It's such a banal and flippant response to a serious issue.

steddyeddy

Is this thread about gender in equality or inequality on the whole?

Dave!

steddyeddy wrote: »

Is this thread about gender in equality or inequality on the whole?

It's mostly about contemporary feminism, its direction, relevance, methods, attitudes, etc.

Jonny Blaze

old hippy wrote: »

On a global perspective I disagree. Mutilation, rape, not being allowed an education, domestic abuse - that seems about as far from equality as you can get.

All of those things would have been the case all over the world in the past whereas now it is mainly in a few developing countries throughout Africa and the middle east.

To say that the entire developed world (Europe, North America etc) have made no advancements beyond the level of regard for women held in the developing world is laughable. My point is that worldwide, women have never had it so good, on account of almost half the world now attributing the same respect, dignity and rights to women as is held for men alone in the other half of the world.

As I said though, there are still areas in need of improvement even here, let alone trying to deal with crazy islamic states that have a religious reason to try and dominate women.

nokia69

old hippy wrote: »

On a global perspective I disagree. Mutilation, rape, not being allowed an education, domestic abuse - that seems about as far from equality as you can get.

he and most other people in the thread are talking about feminists in the western world, we all know that the middle east, africa ect are crap for woman

feminism in the west is just a whinge for bitter woman

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/23/world-cup-women-sexism

have a read of this guardian article to see what feminism in the west has become

Triceratops Ballet

old hippy wrote: »

On a global perspective I disagree. Mutilation, rape, not being allowed an education, domestic abuse - that seems about as far from equality as you can get.

You beat me to it, some western countries have it better than others, and in general the notion of equality between genders is true in Europe (aside from learned social behaviours that cause us to judge men and women differently).

But on a global scale there is a long way to go, there are still large swathes of the world where women do not hold the same civil rights as men, I'm open to correction but isn't it in Saudi that women aren't even allowed to drive cars or ride bikes? Even in the States, the pay gap between men and women is quite significant (though hardly surprising as most states don't even have a minimum wage)

Dave!

e_e wrote: »

I can somewhat understand why the "not all men" response is worthy of ridicule. It's such a banal and flippant response to a serious issue.

Maybe. But in the context of the vitriol that is often thrown around about "men", I can understand some people wanting to say "em, actually... I'm not a misogynist at all." It's disconcerting seeing crass generalisations in which you are included, even if you know yourself that you're not the bad guy. It's natural to want to defend yourself.

JerCotter7

From reading this thread a certain posted has tried their hardest to derail the thread. Wow.

Micky Dolenz

Mod

What say we leave this run for a little while longer to see if we can't have a proper discussion. Is that even possible.

tritium

dottie_lottie wrote: »

Even in the States, the pay gap between men and women is quite significant (though hardly surprising as most states don't even have a minimum wage)

As others have repeatedly pointed out on AH the pay gap is effectively a myth at this stage (I'm sure Wibbs may be along shortly to give his usual detailed breakdown of why this is so)

Amirani

nokia69 wrote: »

he and most other people in the thread are talking about feminists in the western world, we all know that the middle east, africa ect are crap for woman

feminism in the west is just a whinge for bitter woman

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/23/world-cup-women-sexism

have a read of this guardian article to see what feminism in the west has become

That's as representative of feminists as it is of old people. The World Cup is ageist because they don't let old people play. :pac:

Seriously, there's always going to be extreme points of view about, you can't judge an entire movement/ideology based on this. If you do, you're probably being just as extreme as the extremists.

nokia69

Diego Simeone wrote: »

That's as representative of feminists as it is of old people. The World Cup is ageist because they don't let old people play. :pac:

Seriously, there's always going to be extreme points of view about, you can't judge an entire movement/ideology based on this. If you do, you're probably being just as extreme as the extremists.

I read it again and they have removed the best/worse lines, but its similar to the stuff feminists in the guardian pump each and every day

tritium

e_e wrote: »

I can somewhat understand why the "not all men" response is worthy of ridicule. It's such a banal and flippant response to a serious issue.

Actually it's a defensive response, which goes to my earlier point about both sides doing the sweeping generalisation thing. Basically, as has been pointed out in many other threads, the 'all men are potential predators' stuff gets hackles up, and not really surprisingly.

Its also instructive that the #yesallwomen tag that came out in response to this varies between comments on extreme sexism and people equating sexism to 'my health insurer will pay for Viagra but not my birth control' (now that's banal)

Jonny Blaze

dottie_lottie wrote: »

You beat me to it, some western countries have it better than others, and in general the notion of equality between genders is true in Europe (aside from learned social behaviours that cause us to judge men and women differently).

But on a global scale there is a long way to go, there are still large swathes of the world where women do not hold the same civil rights as men, I'm open to correction but isn't it in Saudi that women aren't even allowed to drive cars or ride bikes? Even in the States, the pay gap between men and women is quite significant (though hardly surprising as most states don't even have a minimum wage)

That's fair enough alright.

It's totally true that on the whole throughout much of the world women are treated as second class citizens and that's wrong .

My point, is that why on earth do I have to repeatedly bear the brunt of argument that doesn't affect the society that I live in?

I mean, who exactly are internet feminists trying to reach when they post ad nauseum about the issues to a population who are basically waist deep in equality anyway?

Most of the places that are the worst for treating women also funnily enough don't tend to have a great internet infrastructure built up.

Not to mention that English would rarely be the first language of any of these places for them to read said internet articles, even if they had the internet to do so.

What good really comes about from screaming about equality and rights to a population for whom equality and rights are already guaranteed in law?

Maybe try and focus the rage where it belongs and actually trying to achieve something rather than alienating both men and moderate women alike (you know, the sort who wouldn't even self identify as feminists for fear of the connotations).

I just don't understand what the message is even supposed to be anymore let alone who its supposed to be aimed at.

Amirani

nokia69 wrote: »

I read it again and they have removed the best/worse lines, but its similar to the stuff feminists in the guardian pump each and every day

It's generally in the interest of newspapers to print sensationalist and controversial opinion pieces. As a result, it's in the interests of journalists to try and be as sensational and controversial as they can get away with. You shouldn't be surprised that there's a higher occurrence of extreme opinions in newspapers - you'll find equally as extreme anti-woman opinions in the Daily Mail, which are far worse I think we'll agree.

I think The Guardian is pretty good for the most part, including most of the women's issues opinion pieces it runs.

Jonny Blaze

Dave! wrote: »

Maybe. But in the context of the vitriol that is often thrown around about "men", I can understand some people wanting to say "em, actually... I'm not a misogynist at all." It's disconcerting seeing crass generalisations in which you are included, even if you know yourself that you're not the bad guy. It's natural to want to defend yourself.

Exactly.

At some point I stopped rooting for women and started saying 'wait a second.. how am I the problem?'

GalwayGuy2

old hippy wrote: »

The late, great, Doris Lessing

“Ideally, what should be said to every child, repeatedly, throughout his or her school life is something like this: 'You are in the process of being indoctrinated. We have not yet evolved a system of education that is not a system of indoctrination. We are sorry, but it is the best we can do.

What you are being taught here is an amalgam of current prejudice and the choices of this particular culture. The slightest look at history will show how impermanent these must be. You are being taught by people who have been able to accommodate themselves to a regime of thought laid down by their predecessors. It is a self-perpetuating system.

Those of you who are more robust and individual than others will be encouraged to leave and find ways of educating yourself — educating your own judgements. Those that stay must remember, always, and all the time, that they are being moulded and patterned to fit into the narrow and particular needs of this particular society.”

I wonder dos Dorris Lessing have any form of self awareness whatsoever.

edit:

Also, I've seen mentions of feminists in other countries where women's rights are undeveloped or outwardly harmful towards women.

Eh, I have seen some seriously dodgy stuff said by third world feminists. Just because they live in an environment that is harmful to women, and men, doesn't mean there some kind of messiahs for gender equality.

*Shrugs*

Just my two cents.

old hippy

GalwayGuy2 wrote: »

I wonder dos Dorris Lessing have any form of self awareness whatsoever.

Given that she's been dead a good few months I doubt it.

Read "The Good Terrorist" for starters & then ask yourself the question again.

Wibbs

old hippy wrote: »

On a global perspective I disagree. Mutilation, rape, not being allowed an education, domestic abuse - that seems about as far from equality as you can get.

On two of those fronts it's a grey area. There are far more circumcised men than women. Is it as severe as FGM? Of course not, but it is still bodily "modification" without consent. Put it another way how big would the outcry be if a group decided it would be OK to remove the clitoral hood* of young girls? Regarding domestic abuse almost half of all reported domestic abuse is committed by women on men. How many clinics, refuges, support groups are out there for them?

Don't get me started on the pay gap, because it's largely an utter nonsense in the west.






*precisely analogous to the male tissue removed.

hatrickpatrick

old hippy wrote: »

On a global perspective I disagree. Mutilation, rape, not being allowed an education, domestic abuse - that seems about as far from equality as you can get.

On a local / domestic perspective, women have unfair advantages in all of those areas. Mutulation is illegal when practised on girls but legal and relatively regular on boys, statutory rape laws have discrimination against boys written into them, girls are persistently outperforming boys in an education system which regards boyish energy as a problem, and this is lauded as "progress", and regular ad campaigns paint men as always being the aggressor in domestic violence, never the victim.

In Ireland, and in most of the west, discrimination against men is systematic and routinely dismissed.

GalwayGuy2

old hippy wrote: »

Given that she's been dead a good few months I doubt it.

Read "The Good Terrorist" for starters & then ask yourself the question again.

Hmmm, perhaps I will. Although, telling someone to read a book is usually a lazy arguing style.

But, I do get a vibe of elitism and indoctrination off that quote.

Links234

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Mod

What say we leave this run for a little while longer to see if we can't have a proper discussion. Is that even possible.

The thing is, whenever these kinds of discussions come up, folks tend to cherry pick the nuttiest extremists and hold them up saying "This is what the other side think!" This is made worse by the fact that it's the extremists that shout the loudest. And this happens on both sides of the debate.

The feminist movement has many reasonable goals that I think most people would agree with, and the men's rights movement has many reasonable that I think most people would agree with, and neither have to come at the expense of the other. But the problem is, when each side keeps giving attention to the gasbag nutcases, they take the limelight and overshadow everything else, so we're not even seeing reasonable arguments, never mind discussing them.

e_e

Dave! wrote: »

Maybe. But in the context of the vitriol that is often thrown around about "men", I can understand some people wanting to say "em, actually... I'm not a misogynist at all." It's disconcerting seeing crass generalisations in which you are included, even if you know yourself that you're not the bad guy. It's natural to want to defend yourself.

Can't say it bothers me much at all as a guy. I think the frustration to the "not all men" line is how it reads like they're deflecting and trying to sweep the issue under the carpet instead of confronting it. It's like watching 12 Years a Slave and then going "N... no... not all white people!", kinda redundant as well as a straw man.

If you know you're not a misogynist then it shouldn't bother you really, I used to be taken aback by some of the vitriolic comments too but I've acknowledged that it's not a personal attack on myself at all. That and I can't even begin to understand the issues that others face and the (likely) justified anger they have.

Shakespeare's Sister

The hardline feminists let moderate feminists and women down in my opinion - very much so. I don't need some perpetual seeker of persecution (like that Sinead O'Shea one) telling me I'm awfully repressed. Eh... I'm not.

But if people genuinely think there isn't a problem here on AH in terms of attitudes towards women, I assume they haven't read the thread about online dating and being unemployed, the thread started by the guy who said his female friend was talking about tricking a guy into knocking her up, the thread about beeping at women to get a look at them.
Anyone with any semblance of sense/sanity, not just radfems or feminists or women, would see the issues with what has been said in the above discussions.

Jonny Blaze

Magaggie wrote: »

The hardline feminists let moderate feminists and women down in my opinion - very much so. I don't need some perpetual seeker of persecution (like that Sinead O'Shea one) telling me I'm awfully repressed. Eh... I'm not.

But if people genuinely think there isn't a problem here on AH in terms of attitudes towards women, I assume they haven't read the thread about online dating and being unemployed, the thread started by the guy who said his female friend was talking about tricking a guy into knocking her up, the thread about beeping at women to get a look at them.
Anyone with any semblance of sense/sanity, not just radfems or feminists or women, would see the issues with what has been said in the above discussions.

Maybe a few of the individual posts alright yeah.

But they are the 'vocal minority' in my opinion.

Other than that the debate has been reasonable as far as I would judge.

Shakespeare's Sister

Jonny Blaze wrote: »

Maybe a few of the individual posts alright yeah.

But they are the 'vocal minority' in my opinion.

Other than that the debate has been reasonable as far as I would judge.

Oh yeh this thread, bar isolated bits, isn't the worst. But the threads I mentioned are complete clusterfuqs. Fairly depressing reading in places tbh.

Jonny Blaze

Magaggie wrote: »

Oh yeh this thread, bar isolated bits, isn't the worst. But the threads I mentioned are complete clusterfuqs. Fairly depressing reading in places tbh.

I was actually referring to the lot of them!

But I suppose different strokes and all that. Some of it in the other threads was really bad alright. I still think there may be legitimate concerns in there being drowned out by nasty posts though.

Like the unemployed while dating thread.

To me that was more about someone being uncomfortable having very little to offer a prospective girlfriend or whatever.

I can empathise with that. Even if you might say that that feeling is a product of a patriarchal social indoctrination program designed to make men believe they are the breadwinners and supporters of women and all that.

And maybe that's true to a degree.

But I think of it in the sense that I would rather have some way of contributing to a relationship in a positive way financially, the same way I would be interested in women who can do the same.

I don't think that's unreasonable or sexist at all.

The point being, as others have mentioned, is that the vocal minority in either camp hurts the argument overall.

Shakespeare's Sister

Jonny Blaze wrote: »

To me that was more about someone being uncomfortable having very little to offer a prospective girlfriend or whatever.

I can empathise with that. Even if you might say that that feeling is a product of a patriarchal social indoctrination program designed to make men believe they are the breadwinners and supporters of women and all that.

And maybe that's true to a degree.

But I think of it in the sense that I would rather have some way of contributing to a relationship in a positive way financially, the same way I would be interested in women who can do the same.

I don't think that's unreasonable or sexist at all.

Of course not. The position itself isn't the problem, it's the gleeful jumping on it to say run a mile because women, especially Irish women, only want a rich guy and a guy with a huge car and his own impressive house etc, which is just sh-t - even if it's true for some women.
It's similar to a woman starting a thread saying she's met a guy and really likes him but is nervous about him seeing her naked because of stretchmarks or whatever - and lots of the women responding "Forget it, guys only go near women with flawless, sculpted bodies."

tritium

e_e wrote: »

Can't say it bothers me much at all as a guy. I think the frustration to the "not all men" line is how it reads like they're deflecting and trying to sweep the issue under the carpet instead of confronting it. It's like watching 12 Years a Slave and then going "N... no... not all white people!", kinda redundant as well as a straw man.

If you know you're not a misogynist then it shouldn't bother you really, I used to be taken aback by some of the vitriolic comments too but I've acknowledged that it's not a personal attack on myself at all. That and I can't even begin to understand the issues that others face and the (likely) justified anger they have.

I'm glad you're not offended. However that doesn't give you a right to tell others they shouldn't be offended. Nor should you presume to trivialise or demean them for their offence.

Interesting though that not all men gets such a reaction from you. Are people who go not all feminists equally pushing the issue of the radicals to one side? Are they guilty of a straw man too?

You also seem to have missed a pretty fundamental point - there's quite a difference between being a mysoginist and being accused of being a mysoginist