When did feminism go completely crazy?

[cardgame]

Well maybe if they spoke about male violence without condemning men and being anti-male... offering solutions instead of chanting "Patriarchy!" etc.

but I repeat myself from post #159.

 

[Senethro]

Or maybe men should condemn violence from their group as strongly as we demand muslim community leaders condemn each individual act of terror with even a slightly islamic whiff about it.

Y'know, instead of getting pissy at the feminists about the whole thing.

 

[Arwon]

Well, I don't think the current feminist tactic of shaming (not all) men is working too well.

Step one is for a whooooole bunch of dudes to stop interpreting as "shaming" things that like just totes aren't "shaming". This includes but is not limited to: the recounting of personal experiences, the identification of sexism in our culture, the expression of fears for safety in public areas.

 

[caketastydelish]

I just did a quick google of the Canadian universities Cardgame posed about, seems to be an organised effort by somebody called "Canadians for Equality". Looks like boiler plate MRA stuff and is affiliated with A Voice For Men which is pretty much a hate group/mouthpiece for noted hateful lunatic Paul Elam (the vocabulary of this group legit uses words like "white knight" and "mangina").

Only in a vague, meaningless way are they 'affiliated' with each other. Nobody (reasonable) would deny that AVFM is a hate group, I give you that much. Cafe is much better, and lumping them into the same barrel shows ignorance on the matter. Perhaps you should do more research than "a quick google".

Naturally, the justifications given for denying these groups (as Traitorfish says, student politics is very hard to disentangle) is stuff like blaming rape victims for their rape, claiming there's a false rape epidemic and maybe some death and rape threats and the eventual thing that went ahead was indeed seemingly a full-on MRA group and not a "men's issues discussion".

There were people that made death and rape threats, that much is true. On the other hand the people that made those threats weren't associated with CAFE. Yet at the same time (not to justify the threats) the "other side" of this debate harassed them and literally pulled a fire alarm just to prevent them from holding their meeting, and intimidated them. CAFE isn't a hate group, but hate group people (like AVFM) support CAFE. So the AVFM are going to make rape in death threats in response to those university students pulling the fire alarm... which of course, neither is justified (neither threats is justified nor trying to prevent free speech at the CAFE talk).

edit: you gave us a link of people TALKING ABOUT CAFE, accusing CAFE of blaming rape victims for being raped. Now if you give me the same thing from the CAFE people themselves actually saying it, you would have had a valid point.

 

[sophie]

offering solutions instead of chanting "Patriarchy!" etc.

Except it is.

 

[cardgame]

Step one is for a whooooole bunch of dudes to stop interpreting as "shaming" things that like just totes aren't "shaming". This includes but is not limited to: the recounting of personal experiences, the identification of sexism in our culture, the expression of fears for safety in public areas.

Except it is.

this is a solution?

...the women’s centre opposed efforts to create a comparable men’s centre (which was to be given the same funding). The idea behind the men’s centre was to address men’s issues like suicide, alcoholism, drug abuse, and negative stereotypes, but the women’s centre opposed it by insisting that “the men’s centre is everywhere else” (despite the fact that those men’s issues certainly aren’t being addressed “everywhere else&#8221. Instead they offered a rather spiteful alternative [1]:

The website lists support for the idea of a “male allies project” that would “bring self-identified men together to talk about masculinity and its harmful effects.” Masculinity, it says, “denigrates women by making them into sexual objects, is homophobic, encourages violence, and discourages emotional expression.”

See, it's not patriarchy, it's not even society, it's masculinity; it's men. men bad. women good.

 

[Evie]

The entire idea that there is a standard of how men should behave, that this is the example that need to be set for men, and that men who fail to follow it are less worthy of being called men than those who do is one of the biggest steaming pile of cow manure we as a society have produced.

And that is what masculinity is. This whole delusion that men HAVE to be though, that men HAVE to have sex to validate themselves, that men CAN'T show their emotions (and probably shouldn't have them at all), and that failure to be though or to hide your emotions make you less of a man.

And of course that standard does harm women, first because of the whole "woman are just a way for men to validate themselves" thing, and second because it turns "girl" and similar words into insult. "You hit like a girl", "Stop crying like a girl", etc. The WHOLE concept of masculinity is pretty much "Don't be a woman", which directly feed into devaluing anything associated with women.

So...yeah. Masculinity IS the problem.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Everybody hates Dawkins.

Funny... I'm fairly sure I exist, and am therefore a part of this group of lifeforms making up "everybody." I don't hate Dawkins. Therefore "everybody" does not hate Dawkins.

It's possible to disagree with some points without hating the one who said it.

Not at all, in fact people like you make feminism look much better.

Anyway I read about halfway through the God Delusion and didn't find it particularly offensive.

I should read that some time.

Seven pages of responses in less than 20 hours?

<backs away slowly>

That's what happens here with the more contentious topics.

...it's insanely difficult for nerdy guys to find single girls who share their interests.

Try looking at science fiction conventions (the ones that emphasize writing over meeting actors) and in the Society for Creative Anachronism. Most of the women I ever met there are into science, computers, gaming, SF, and so on.


@Arwon: Okay, I followed your link and found articles from several years ago. I asked people to link me to any of his videos that you found offensive so I can decide if I would find them offensive as well.

If I'm to be convinced to hate Dawkins or find him offensive, I'd rather do it on the basis of what he says himself, instead of what other people say about him.

 

[Sonereal]

women good.

Lady better.

TIL there are people who tolerate Dawkins still.

 

[Arwon]

@Arwon: Okay, I followed your link and found articles from several years ago. I asked people to link me to any of his videos that you found offensive so I can decide if I would find them offensive as well.

If I'm to be convinced to hate Dawkins or find him offensive, I'd rather do it on the basis of what he says himself, instead of what other people say about him.

You could follow his twitter account. It's pretty unbearable even when he's not bloviating about whose rape was real. But as far as stuff he's specifically said, this attack on someone talking about sexual harassment is pretty nauseating.

 

[Arwon]

this is a solution?

See, it's not patriarchy, it's not even society, it's masculinity; it's men. men bad. women good.

*Tell* me you understand the difference between masculinity and men and are just being oblivious for effect.

Edit: what Oda said. Masculinity, ie parts of how masculinity is currently constructed and expected to be performed, are the source of a lot of problems with violence and sexism. Male entitlement to sex, those ideas about toughness and dominance and status, and so forth. Those masculine expectations very frequently reduce women to objects viewed in terms of sexual availability and association with men.

Changing those ideas - a feminist project btw - can help a lot. They're completely right to focus on contemporary masculinity as problematic.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

You could follow his twitter account. It's pretty unbearable even when he's not bloviating about whose rape was real. But as far as stuff he's specifically said, this attack on someone talking about sexual harassment is pretty nauseating.

Yeah, okay. I do follow a few people on Twitter, but I don't actually go there much. I tend to follow Canadians there, like Chris Hadfield and, most recently, Margaret Atwood.

I'm still not seeing links to videos, guys. I did see the one where he interviewed Wendy Wright. I fail to see that he said anything offensive at all in that one. "The evidence is in the museum, I wish you would go and look at it" is not something I would consider offensive.

 

[caketastydelish]

*Tell* me you understand the difference between masculinity and men and are just being oblivious for effect.

Edit: what Oda said. Masculinity, ie parts of how masculinity is currently constructed and expected to be performed, are the source of a lot of problems with violence and sexism. Male entitlement, those ideas about toughness and dominance, and so forth.

Changing those ideas - a feminist project btw - can help a lot. They're completely right to focus on contemporary masculinity as problematic.

Seeing everything male as problematic is by definition misandric- and to those saying "misandry isn't a real thing"- I agree it isn't nowhere near as much as misogyny. On the other hand when you literally say "masculinity is evil which stems from men" what do we even have to work with?

Male 'entitlement' is one thing. I'll go as far to say I'm against all forms of violence. And dominance outside of bedroom play isn't particularly masculine to begin with.

 

[Arwon]

Seeing everything male as problematic is by definition misandric- and to those saying "misandry isn't a real thing"- I agree it isn't nowhere near as much as misogyny. On the other hand when you literally say "masculinity is evil which stems from men" what do we even have to work with?

Male 'entitlement' is one thing. I'll go as far to say I'm against all forms of violence. And dominance outside of bedroom play isn't particularly masculine to begin with.

Gahhhh it isn't "everything male" it's a particular set of social expectations and ideas.

 

[Evie]

It's not that everything about conception of "being male" is a problem (though many parts of it are, indeed, problematic).

It's having a conception - a social expectation - of what it means to be male in the first place that's the problem, because it harms anyone who is physically a male yet fail to meet that conception (on top of any harm it causes to woman).

Even if the current concept of masculinity was replaced by something that was absolutely 100% harmless to woman, it would still be toxic to those who fail to meet it.

And, since the whole point is about "This is what makes you a man"...it's pretty sure that people who fail to meet that definition would be compared to women (as in "The opposite of man" as a way to put them down.

 

[Arwon]

Street harassment is a good example. Most women have experienced instances where men have yelled stuff at them, groped them, followed them, done other creepy things. Many women experience this from a very young age.

Part of the origin of that behaviour is as an expression of masculine assumptions about entitlement to women's bodies (whether it be to pass comment, to touch, to pursue, with no sense of her having her own personhood and right to be left alone - men will frequently think they have some sort of right to do this, that it's harmless, that women secretly want it, and they'll often get angry when such things "rejected"). Part is also from the status placed on sexual conquest and on social dominance of women.

Part of reducing this behaviour, then, is surely addressing how masculinity is constructed from a young age, how it is related to women, autonomy and consent. For instance, at school when boys chase, grope, dack or kiss girls, if that's treated lightly as "boys will be boys" and not strongly quashed and the girls' individuality and rights and consent strongly emphasised, then some boys will grow up with that same sense of entitlement and translate it over to harassing or abusive behaviour.

That's just as one micro-example of questioning masculinity and cultural change. It's not the whole picture, it's not going to solve everything, but the less these ideas continue to circulate, the less motivation and cover there are for a wide range of bad behaviours.

 

[caketastydelish]

It's not that everything about conception of "being male" is a problem (though many parts of it are, indeed, problematic).

It's having a conception - a social expectation - of what it means to be male in the first place that's the problem, because it harms anyone who is physically a male yet fail to meet that conception (on top of any harm it causes to woman).

Even if the current concept of masculinity was replaced by something that was absolutely 100% harmless to woman, it would still be toxic to those who fail to meet it.

And, since the whole point is about "This is what makes you a man"...it's pretty sure that people who fail to meet that definition would be compared to women (as in "The opposite of man" as a way to put them down.

Fair enough.

Street harassment is a good example. Most women have experienced instances where men have yelled stuff at them, groped them, followed them, done other creepy things.

Not that I agree with such 10 year old worthy behavior, but how common actually is it? "Most women have experienced it once or twice in a lifetime" isn't the same thing as common. I've never done any such behavior to women- and yes I know this isn't all about me. But I'm a 23 year old who has spent a lot of time with other dudes/gals my age, and none of them seem to be behaving in that way. If it happens all the time, it must either not happen in my area or somehow magically never happen when I'm around.

Part of the origin of that behaviour is masculine assumptions about entitlement to women's bodies (whether it be to pass comment, to touch, to pursue, with no sense of her having her own personhood and right to be left alone)

Men literally believe they can touch women however they like without their consent? I find this hard to believe, and if it were true, there would be a hell of a lot more men in jail. There are *some* men that believe this, sure. There are *some* people that will believe any absurd thing. Take the anti-vaccination lulz for example. What I want are statistics that the mainstream population of men believe what you're saying.

and the status placed on sexual conquest and social dominance. Part of reducing this behaviour, then, is addressing how masculinity is constructed from a young age. For instance, at school when boys chase, grope, dack or kiss girls, if that's treated lightly as "boys will be boys" and not strongly quashed and the girls' individuality and rights and consent strongly emphasised, then some boys will grow up with that same sense of entitlement. Just as one micro example of questioning masculinity and cultural change.

Boys were not allowed to touch girls private parts and grope them, etc at my high school and middle school, and it was not a particularly rich or good one. It was a high poverty public school. If this happens all the time elsewhere, those particular schools need to stop doing a half-assed job of preventing that behavior. But calling a "universal male experience" is a gross exaggeration.

 

[sophie]

Not that I agree with such 10 year old worthy behavior, but how common actually is it? "Most women have experienced it once or twice in a lifetime" isn't the same thing as common. I've never done any such behavior to women- and yes I know this isn't all about me. But I'm a 23 year old who has spent a lot of time with other dudes/gals my age, and none of them seem to be behaving in that way. If it happens all the time, it must either not happen in my area or somehow magically never happen when I'm around.

Really common. Especially in larger cities. Also in really subtle ways that you probably don't notice.

 

[Arwon]

Fair enough.

Not that I agree with such 10 year old worthy behavior, but how common actually is it? "Most women have experienced it once or twice in a lifetime" isn't the same thing as common. I've never done any such behavior to women- and yes I know this isn't all about me. But I'm a 23 year old who has spent a lot of time with other dudes/gals my age, and none of them seem to be behaving in that way. If it happens all the time, it must either not happen in my area or somehow magically never happen when I'm around.

Men literally believe they can touch women however they like without their consent? I find this hard to believe, and if it were true, there would be a hell of a lot more men in jail. There are *some* men that believe this, sure. There are *some* people that will believe any absurd thing. Take the anti-vaccination lulz for example. What I want are statistics that the mainstream population of men believe what you're saying.

Boys were not allowed to touch girls private parts and grope them, etc at my high school and middle school, and it was not a particularly rich or good one. It was a high poverty public school. If this happens all the time elsewhere, those particular schools need to stop doing a half-assed job of preventing that behavior. But calling a "universal male experience" is a gross exaggeration.

This stuff happens all the time, and of course as a dude you don't see much of it. My gf gets a lot of comments, a lot of looks, the occasional shout from a car. Sometimes multiple incidents in a 15 minute walk from her work to her bus. It essentially does not happen when I'm around. If it's happening while I'm somewhere else and I come back near her, it stops. Sometimes even when I'm with her she'll get subtle stares, a couple of blokes looking at her and whispering to each other, often stuff I've been completely oblivious to, but occasionally stuff I've managed to catch.

My former housemates, most of my friends, similar things. And you can find endless blog posts, reddit posts, articles, whatever, full of people's personal experiences.

As for prevalence of harrasment and unwanted advances? Here's the Austrlaian government's Institute of Family Studies:

Being subjected to sexually harassing behaviours is a particularly common experience for women (Pina & Gannon, 2012). Given the pervasive and often highly public nature of these behaviours, it is perhaps not surprising that high numbers of women have been subjected to sexual harassment and street harassment. Indeed, Tuerkheimer (1997) went as far as to say that for many women "street harassment seems an inevitable part of our existence" (p. 180; see also Laniya, 2005). For example, in Macmillan and colleagues' (2000) study "more than 80 per cent [of participants] experienced some form of stranger harassment, and almost 30 per cent experienced explicitly confrontational forms of harassment" (p. 319). This study drew on data from the Canadian-based 1993 Violence Against Women Survey, and used a representative sample of 12,300 women aged 18 years or older. Similarly, Lenton et al.'s (1999) study of 1,990 Canadian women found:

nine in ten women have experienced at least one incident of public harassment, and three in ten have been involved in the most severe type of harassment, where the perpetrator touched or tried to touch the victim in a sexual way. (p. 537)

[...]

Around 41% of the 228 female college students in Fairchild and Rudman's (2008) study indicated that they experienced "unwanted sexual attention from strangers at least once a month, including sexist remarks or seductive come ons" (p. 353). In addition to this, approximately one-third of these participants reported experiencing harassment such as "catcalls, whistles, and stares every few days or more" (p. 353). Finally, one-quarter of Fairchild and Rudman's sample encountered experiences "akin to sexual coercion or assault at least once a month" (p. 353). Based on these data, the authors argued that sexual harassment by strangers functions as "a significant form of humiliation and indignity that targets women and is likely to undermine the quality of their lives" (p. 353).

According to the AHRC national sexual harassment survey, one-third of women surveyed have experienced sexual harassment since the age of 15. Further, one-quarter of women had experienced sexual harassment in the workplace in the past 5 years (AHRC, 2012).

Finally, as with other forms of sexual violence, these statistics are likely to underestimate the true extent of women's experiences of sexual harassment. Victims of sexual harassment may not recognise or label their experience as constituting harassment (Pina & Gannon, 2012).

Virtually all women experience it occasionally. It doesn't take many negative experiences to have a lifetime's impact on how you dress, act, where you go, and when. It's an environment of constant potential harrassment, with the possiblity of worse lurking in every interaction. ("Will this dude be the one who gets angry, follows and hurts me?"). It functionally limits womens' freedom of movement.

Here's the thing though. That impulse that it must be rare, that difficulty believing that this entitlement exists, the invalidation or dismissal of reported experience? It's really common. And that's really part of the problem. It's actually male privilege in action. I've watched men, in conversations about incidents of harrassment, jump straight to looking for excuses or ways to trivialise or dismiss it like "they were just being friendly" or "what were you wearing?" even with women close to them. I get that it's an unpleasant thought that the whole spectrum of entitled harassing creepy behaviours are as common as they are. But regardless, if you're not getting that this stuff is really common you're really not listening or paying attention. And of course, that impulse to disbelief and minimalisation is part of the cover that lets this behaviour go.

 

[JollyRoger]

Abusive racists have it quite tough out there, we turn one way we are called white, the other way and we are called male, it's a vicious cycle.