I want to understand Feminism

Oh, I've read every word of this thread, right from the o.p. and was surprised that so little of it has any bearing on what is generally referred to as 'feminism.' Incidents of unfair treatment of accused rapists (and such incidents are relatively rare) and misuse of the TRO have no relevance to feminism, which is, basically, a movement to protect women from male exploitation and to provide them with equality of opportunity in the work-place and education and everywhere else. You, max, seem to have an anti-female agenda under which anything that is seen a s unfair to men is immediately seen as a part of a feminist movement. On most of these issues we're talking apples and oranges here.

Please explain... what have I said here, or anywhere else, that shows I have an anti-female agenda?

This is a good example of what I am talking about-- this is an ideology that no one can question without being attacked as anti-female.

Yeah, Lust. I agree. Nobody here has simply broken "feminism" down to "Equality, that's not so equal."

I would argue more but I'm female, so suspect. This is sort of like 1962.

So long as relatively is defined as being in the neighborhood of 10%


http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2014/09/false_rape_accusations_why_must_be_pretend_they_never_happen.html

Harrumph.

You know what's funny, Max? These idiots "fight for the truth", but everyone sees it differently.

Idiots, I say! They don't even notice their stupidity.

Wrong. You have not been questioning feminist ideology. You haven't even mentioned a single plank in any feminist platform. What you have been talking about has nothing to do with feminist ideology. You've been talking about specific examples of unfair behavior and somehow managed to imply that all these examples have general feminist backing. From where I stand, nothing could be further from the truth. Early on in this thread someone lamented that 'feminism' seems to have gotten confused with a general civil liberties stance. If that's so, then how can feminism be accused of being, in some sense, anti civil rights?

Lust, you don't know what "feminism" is. You're just making **** up to make yourself look right.

Most of us aren't idealogues.

Now we get to meet up with the enraged Maxcondona, the maestro of the superficial data.

He is the idealogue.



Meantime, all this isn't my interest.

I don't think I am the one who is enraged here, in fact I rather enjoyed the bitter sarcasm of your last post...

Sarcastic people and serious people are never meant to be taken seriously for any reason, Max.

Trust me - they have nothing to contribute with.

bitter sarcasm? you kidding?

Not from me,

but maybe sometime later.

Lustig,We haven't defined a "feminist platform".

I raised two issues; the lack of due process for men accused of rape on college campuses, and an opposition to what I consider to be a reasonable reform to the process of obtaining a restraining order (which I believe is unfair to the accused).

Neither of these positions is anti-woman (any more than being in favor of due process for murder suspects is pro-murder). It would be possible for two reasonable people to have a discussion on these topics that didn't devolve to name-calling.

In my opinion one side of each of these issues have been dominated by people associated feminism. I believe I have provided good sources (for example an article written by a feminist) to back that up.

But again, two logical people could disagree about whether these issues are feminist issues or without devolving into name calling or childish attacks.

Feminism is an ideology or a movement or something. Whatever it is, it isn't sacred. The concept of feminism is certainly used in public policy discussions, and there is no reason that it can't be questioned or for heaven's sake criticized.

And Feminism doesn't represent the sum-total of women. I don't think that any ideology represents women as a group on any non-trivial issue. The backlash against feminism includes quite a few females.

I am not sure if you are actually saying that anti-feminist equals anti-woman. But if you were saying that, it would be ridiculous ridiculous.

I agree with you at least this much -- I, too, hope that the issue can be discussed without name-calling or similar vituperation. So far I haven't seen any of that on this thread.

Hmmm Lustig. You did accuse me of having an "anti female agenda". It doesn't really matter here where there is no real pressure for politically correct speech. But, this type of accusation does corrupt the debate on public policy issues that matter in the real world.

That is the point. It is too easy to tar someone as "anti-female" as a way of preventing anyone from questioning your ideology.

There is so little reasonable, proportioned discussion here. For example, talking about unwarranted reports of rape is completely meaningless without statistics on how many other types of crimes are "over-reported." I do find it hilarious, though, that there are people who vehemently despise and vilify those whom they label feminists, and yet claim that these evil agents are able to threaten others with their condemnations. If feminists are justifiably vilified, why would their public statements against someone be any threat to the targeted individual?

You seem to have missed this post, Max. Your performance here has so far been wonderfully evidence free.

This makes no sense.

My comment was that people accused of a crime should be given a fair hearing with due process. This is a statement of what, in my opinion, is core to fairness. I made no claim about statistics or about any crime (including rape) being over-reported.

You are setting up a strawman. I must say your ideological purity on this topic, which is clearly sacred to so many people, is both impressive and heartwarming.

Go up this page and read Whackeye's post in which he says that 10% of accusations of rape are unfounded. That statistic is meaningless without a baseline to compare it to other allegedly unfounded accusations of criminal behavior. Not everything that people post is about you, dipshit. I set up no strawman, i responded to Whackeye's post. Get over yourself, Mr. Scientific Evidence. So far, i've seen zero evidence from you.