I cannot identify what it is with dudes and radical feminism. There must be some strange extra-sensory siren call that attracts dudes and dudely opinion to articles, blogs, and heck even just mere information about women speaking unequivocally about their experiences and analysis of society. Of course the attraction is just one part of this warlocks brew, the most infuriating part is that the dudes once attracted, have the overwhelming desire… nay with seemingly single-minded animus to grandiloquently extrude their man-centric opinion blithely into feminist conversation. At the very same time,said dudes, expect to be taken seriously with all the gravitas and respect they usually receive while intoning their manly wizdom.
Concomitantly, dudes assume that their experience is just the same as everyone else in society(??) and thus, without research or understanding, make pronouncements that, to the finely tuned lobes of radical feminists, sound like Grade A, First Tier, patriarchally laced bullshit. Once called on their bullshite phase two sets in, displaying in full glory the fragility of the male ego and the ensuing stampede, to either Godwin,Flouce or have a full blown mantrum as they exit from the thread. Let me assure you gentle readers, this cycle of male-fail is a most dependable and curious clockwork… But I digress. The RPOJ has leapt into my hand quivering in anticipation of the justice about to be dispensed.
Today friends we delve deep into the world of dudes explaining Radical Feminism AND misandry – all in one post – who would have known it was soooooo easy. Let’s put on our swashbuckling pantaloons and join The Brain in the Jar; hmm…lets tighten that up a bit and go with Shit for Brains (SfB); and watch as he puts on his Mansplaining boots and beats all your favourite strawfeminist arguments to death.
The original post by ‘Brain in a Jar: Of Radical Feminism and Misandry’ ,in all its glory can be found here.
“Whenever I bring up the subject of feminism, I always hear about those crazy extremists who really are all about hating men. I’m sure they exist.”
Well if you only talk to other dudes and MRA’s why of course you are going to get a nuance free view of feminism and feminists. Looking beyond your own bias is hard, and who the fuck wants to do that?
“There plenty of crazy ideas out there, and misandry is actually saner compared to them.”
Awww! Lookit SfB put on this big-boy-boots of equality and deep understanding, to show how amazingly aware he is of what he’s prevaricating on about.
“Women are also parrt of the dating game, so the terrible of reality of people wanting to have sex with you but not be in a relationship must have taken its toll on some. The thing is, these people can never refer to an example of such a radical feminist.”
Editing, what the fuck is it? Also, did you catch the subtle(?) hostility toward women? I mean isn’t it totally obvs that women are in the position of power when it comes to dating and relationships? (*eyes rolling into back of head*) That whole male violence/rape culture stuff those feminists prattle on about sure clouds the issue about those bitches not knowing their place and bowing to my ‘peen.
“They also don’t see that misandry and feminism, even the radical version, are two seperate things.. You can point out misandry all you want, and if it makes sense I’ll get behind you. It’ll never be a solid criticism of feminism or radical feminism.”
Well SfB, for one thing you are talking about two different categories. Feminism exists, misandry cannot. Whoa, whoa, whoa… whadya mean there is no misandry, surely it exists just like misogyny. Its time for a learning moment tadpoles, so listen up. Misogyny is the systemic hatred and violence against women, it is a structural feature of society based on the relationship between the dominant class and the oppressed class. And if we all remember rule one (#1!) of class relations is that the oppressed class can never oppress the dominant class. See any argument about ‘reverse-racism’ just to check how jaw-droppingly-stupid that concept along with ‘misandry’ is.
Let’s back off a level and deconstruct what this introductory paragraph is saying. Past the butt-hurt and shitty composition it is sorta hard to tell, but I’ll go out on a limb and say it about to be a dudely explanation of what,and how radical feminism is. Of course, the following paragraphs will be filled with so much straw we’ll need a fire permit…but I’m only guessing here. Maybe if SfB had actually looked at Finally Feminism 101, maybe he’ll be charitable… maybe rabid spider monkeys will fly out of Bernie Sanders ass and abscond with the Donald while we’re at it.
“We need to define these terms before we can talk about them. Feminism and misandry easy.”
Woo! Definition time! Nothing like setting out some rock-solid axioms on which to make some unshakably valid arguments. A recipe for success!
“Feminism is the belief that the limits imposed on women, by various things must be lifted in order to achieve gender equality. Feminism is about equality, but it’s concerned mainly with women’s issues. Something is a feminist issue when it targets women (The wage gap), not necessarily when a man is an asshole and happens to annoy a few females (Manspreading).”
*sigh* Well that was a nice idea. Feminism is about liberating women from the patriarchal constructs of society. Done. Let’s not raise the straw-equality boogie man, because we need less, not more word-fap in the world.
Full marks SfB for helpfully demarcating what is a feminist issue and what isn’t. Mansplination is the only game on tap here, let me assure you gentle readers.
“Misandry is prejudice and hatred of males. It’s misogyny, only for males. Something is misandrist when it targets males as the problem, and generally attributes it to them being male. For example, the whole Manspreading debate is misandrist because it targets men for something that is not necessarily exclusive to males, and doesn’t back it up.”
Aaaaand misandry doesn’t exist. Other than that you’re doing great SfB! Oh, and btw, Manspreading is actually a phenomenon it stems from the socialization we all receive in society – the same set of transmitted values that tells women they must be quiet and submissive. The very same socialization that allows males to take up more space on trains and figuratively in discourse where expertise, because XY chromosome, is the norm.
“Misandry generally exposes itself when people attribute bad deeds mostly to males, while ignoring the victims.”
So how much blame should we assign to the victims? Oh dear, dear, SfB, you are getting yourself into quite the sticky-wicket here.
“It’s easiest to spot misandry when someone complains about something males do that doesn’t target any specific group (Assuming he has proof it’s done mostly by males), or attributing a bad behavior to males without any evidence.”
Considering that we’ve established before than misandry isn’t a thing, it behooves me to parallel you and Elmer Fudd and his crack hunting techniques: “Be werry werry quiet, we are huntn’ misandry”…[step 2 through 9]… and then gun then blows up in your face.
“Radical feminism is not misandrty. For the sake of definition, I will use ‘radical’ as any example of bad feminism.”
And let the grand march of straw begin. Radical feminism concerns itself with the root problems facing women in society. Not having enough brainpower to properly define shit makes your arguments piss poor and highly unlikely to contain anything more than wooly, wearisome, word-fap. *sigh* But one must see these things through till the end…
“Radical feminism is when feminists view everything through the lens of feminism, and interpart anything based on whether it promotes equality or not.”
Well, lol-burgers, there went the first cascade of straw. Radical feminism, is about dismantling the structures and features of society that oppress women. Female liberation is the ultimate goal.
“It turns many personal things into political.”
You see it is stuff like this that means you’ve at least seen the phrase used in print before. Of course, you have zero notion of context or meaning of the statement within feminism. Oh and in this age of the magical internet, ignorance is such a weak defence.
This, SfB, is from the first result of said magical search:
“The term was created to underscore what was happening in women’s personal lives–i.e. access to health care, being responsible for all of the housework, possibly being sexually assaulted in our own homes–was a political issue. This was meant to 1.) inspire women to be politically active in the issues that affected their lives and 2.) make sure that politicians paid attention to women’s lives–and look at how the laws ignored women. “
Yeah, so damn straight the personal is political. You are welcome for this helpful educational moment brought you by yours truly. Now let’s get back to the grand straw canvas you happen to be fervently knitting together.
“Radical feminism is criticizing women who prefer to be submissive and passive during sex, or choose a more traditional role.”
Damn, we certainly need to know more about your ‘peen’s preferences in bitches and ‘hoes because it is so important and relevant to radical feminism.
“Radical feminism is feminism shooting itself in the foot. It aims for equality, but ends up limiting women just like the patriarchy. “
The only one here with the smoking gun and foot trauma is you SfB. Radical feminism critiques the actions of women as a class, but realizes that each woman, as an individual, knows best how to make her struggle within the patriarchy palatable for her.
Believe it or not Class Analysis and Individual Criticism are not the same thing. *mind-blown*!!!!!
“However, since feminism is concerned with women’s issues, it’s only radical feminism when it discusses women’s issues.”
I can’t even… Proof reading, what the fuck is it?
“Radical feminism is limiting women in the name of equality.”
Your colossal ignorance, combined with your smug assuredness has set you up to be featured on Dunning and Kruger‘s all time Greatest Hits album. I know, I know SfB… you need to nail this jello based argument to the wall with a ‘whiz-bang’ conclusion. We’re so going there, so hang on tight.
“There’s obviously common ground between misandry and radical feminism. Both are irrational, and are more of an emotional reaction instead of a logical one. Hating males is an emotion. “
All that you have demonstrated is that *you* are irrational. Because you’ve repeatedly shown that basic research is light years beyond your capacities. You make stupid shit up, rightly call your construction stupid, and then(?) do you seriously expect people to agree and laud you with accolades for all the hard work involved in assiduously polishing the monumental turd of a post you’ve extruded onto the interwebs?
Not. Today. Son.
The very best part is that you resort to sexist tropes to ‘reinforce’ your point. Was it hysterical women who dropped the atomic bomb, not once, but twice? Was it women who decided that WW1 wasn’t awesome enough and decided that a round 2 was just what the doctor ordered? Was it women who thought that invading Iraq would be the exactly the remedy for the strife in the Middle East and nothing but democracy and prosperity would flow?
If women are so fucking completely emotionally irrational, I say bring it on because I’m quite tired of the male cool-hard-rationality that has brought us to this point in our fucking blood-soaked, genocidal history.
“Feminists who shoot themselves in the foot do it because they feel so much like victims they’ll attack anything that reinforces that belief. Still, while both are problematic we can’t solve a problem if we don’t know what it is. More importantly, don’t talk about a quack idea or a radical movement if you can’t show them. “
If you can believe it, SfB, you are alluding to the take away I hope to give to my readers. Ignorant male conceptions of what feminism is are often misguided, poorly researched, and self-serving in nature. This RPOJ article is a giant gleaming arrow in the desert pointing to a befouled oasis of “shit not to do while writing about feminism“. So your grand failure is at least in some sense a noble gesture. This example of your writing, and subsequent deconstruction, make people put their hands over their mouths and go…”oooooo, I don’t want to be that guy”. And for your efforts, in that sense, we can rejoice!
“Everyone can invent a radical version of something in their heads, but the real things are harder to spot. If they aren’t, they’re funnier than anything on TV. Most things are funnier than TV.”
You’ve got making shit up down in spades ‘bro. Rest assured. Writing conclusions (among other things) that make a wit of sense needs a smidge more work.