How does Feminism view Men?

[freethinker44]

I don't think a person has to have no prejudices to be "good."

Of course, everyone has prejudices.The problem comes when they are made aware of their prejudices and instead of rejecting them or at least attempting to, they embrace their prejudices. That person is no longer a good person, they are a proud bigot.

I know people who believe that atheists will burn in Hell for eternity, but they treat me well. I don't call them horrible people because of their belief.

OK, perfect example.
Good person: someone that believes atheists will burn in hell, and are bothered by that.
Horrible person: someone that believes atheists will burn in hell, and are happy about that.
See the difference?

Now let's try with separatist sexism.
Good person: doesn't trust the opposite sex because of traumatic event, realizes this is unhealthy and seeks to overcome it.
Horrible person: doesn't trust the opposite sex because of traumatic event, doesn't care and doesn't want to change it.

If someone knowingly defends sexism or racism or any other messed up ideology, they are not a good person, regardless of their intentions.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Of course, everyone has prejudices.The problem comes when they are made aware of their prejudices and instead of rejecting them or at least attempting to, they embrace their prejudices. That person is no longer a good person, they are a proud bigot.

OK, perfect example.
Good person: someone that believes atheists will burn in hell, and are bothered by that.
Horrible person: someone that believes atheists will burn in hell, and are happy about that.
See the difference?

Now let's try with separatist sexism.
Good person: doesn't trust the opposite sex because of traumatic event, realizes this is unhealthy and seeks to overcome it.
Horrible person: doesn't trust the opposite sex because of traumatic event, doesn't care and doesn't want to change it.

I think our experiences are probably different, then. I know people who embrace their prejudices, but they are not horrible people. Beliefs and worldviews are complicated things. As much as I would like to say that everyone who enjoys the thought of atheists' burning in Hell is a bad person, I can't. People are often multifaceted, so it's not reasonable to pin down one, two, or even a few prejudices and say that the person is necessarily bad overall because of them.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Sorry to storm out of this thread, but I need to try to sleep. Busy day tomorrow. I'll be back if I can't fall asleep.

Talk to you later, @freethinker44. Have a good night.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Okay, I can't sleep, and another thought came to mind concerning this subject, so I'm going to post it.

I think we have strayed from the main point of contention here, which is sexual separatism. I don't think that sex is a right, so I see no problem with someone abstaining from having sex with people of any gender. Respectful treatment is a right, so it's a different matter. But sex? Nobody is entitled to that by sheer virtue of their existence. Just like some people are not attracted to White people, Black people, brunettes, blondes, etc., some people would rather not have sex with people of a given gender. That's their right, and I don't think anyone should demonize them for their decision.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think we have strayed from the main point of contention here, which is sexual separatism.

That wasn't the main point of my argument.

 

[Debater Slayer]

That wasn't the main point of my argument.

What was, then?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

What was, then?

Radical feminism's misandry, transphobia and exclusion of non-white women. Then it became about sexual abuse and effectively encouraging trauma victims to remain victims instead of healing. You're the one who started going on about separatism.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Radical feminism's misandry, transphobia and exclusion of non-white women. Then it became about sexual abuse and effectively encouraging trauma victims to remain victims instead of healing. You're the one who started going on about separatism.

I see no hint of transphobia and exclusion of non-White women here:

The healthy thing to do is to address the trauma itself rather than letting it go on. People who have suffered traumatic events should not be coddled or coddle themselves. That creates isolation, paranoia and further issues and does nothing to address the issue. The issue must be recognized and faced in order to heal and move on from it.

Now if a woman just simply isn't into guys, that's fine. But if the real issue is that her view of men/males has been distorted and stunted due to trauma, then that certainly needs addressing. (I'm talking about therapy, being open, mindful and honest about it, not allowing it to control your life and perceptions, etc.; I am not saying that women who have been raped by men need to just go out and get banged by a guy, as you so crudely inferred.)

And not all radical feminists are misandrist or transphobic. For someone who is transgendered and therefore a target of a lot of negative generalizations, I thought you would know better than to generalize like that.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I see no hint of transphobia and exclusion of non-White women here:

Go back a few pages. Like here: http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/how-does-feminism-view-men.182625/page-7

And not all radical feminists are misandrist or transphobic. For someone who is transgendered and therefore a target of a lot of negative generalizations, I thought you would know better than to generalize like that.

I know that not all are, but many are.

 

[freethinker44]

Okay, I can't sleep, and another thought came to mind concerning this subject, so I'm going to post it.

I think we have strayed from the main point of contention here, which is sexual separatism. I don't think that sex is a right, so I see no problem with someone abstaining from having sex with people of any gender. Respectful treatment is a right, so it's a different matter. But sex? Nobody is entitled to that by sheer virtue of their existence. Just like some people are not attracted to White people, Black people, brunettes, blondes, etc., some people would rather not have sex with people of a given gender. That's their right, and I don't think anyone should demonize them for their decision.

People can make any choices they want, and as long as those choices don't hurt anyone else, their choices should be respected. The problem comes when they make choices because they are sexist. People should have the right to be sexist or racist, but we should absolutely demonize them for it, in fact, I would consider it a duty of any person that considers theirself "good".

 

[Debater Slayer]

Go back a few pages. Like here: http://www.religiousforums.com/threads/how-does-feminism-view-men.182625/page-7

This jumped right at my attention:

Are you talking about that "cotton ceiling" stuff that a certain type of radfem seized on, misrepresented and used to slander lesbian trans women as sexual predators? That's largely a myth (the way it was portrayed by transphobic radfems) that started over a small workshop that Planned Parenthood hosted dealing with the issues between trans lesbians and cis lesbians.

http://www.transadvocate.com/cotton...trans-conspiracy-to-rape-lesbians_n_10251.htm

By the way, rejecting someone solely because of their genitals (or what you assume their genitals to be) and effectively erasing their identity and their actual lived lives is transphobic and is, at the very least, based on ignorance. It's not something that's an issue only between lesbian trans women and lesbian cis women, either. It exists with straight men and women, and gay men. Trans men face those problems, too. Sometimes we get turned down by gay men and straight women merely because we don't have an XY body. There's problems with that even with bisexuals!

It also leads to some confused and confusing stances, like how some lesbians will date FtMs but not MtFs.

So that topic was really to discuss issues of body shame and erasure of identity.

Are you really saying that refusing to date a person because of their genitals is "transphobic"? I wouldn't date someone with a penis, period. Having preferences regarding people's bodies when you date them is not transphobic.

I know that not all are, but many are.

So? Many Christians are violent, and many Muslims are terrorists. It doesn't mean that Christianity or Islam are violent in and of themselves.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

Is there something different the Umoja Women can do? They are explicitly separatist.

http://www.umojawomen.net/HOME.html

 

[Debater Slayer]

People can make any choices they want, and as long as those choices don't hurt anyone else, their choices should be respected. The problem comes when they make choices because they are sexist. People should have the right to be sexist or racist, but we should absolutely demonize them for it, in fact, I would consider it a duty of any person that considers theirself "good".

That's like saying that people who are not attracted to White or Black people are racist. It's a preference. You can't force yourself to be attracted to someone, and they don't have a right to demand your attraction.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

This jumped right at my attention:



Are you really saying that refusing to date a person because of their genitals is "transphobic"? I wouldn't date someone with a penis, period. Having preferences regarding people's bodies when you date them is not transphobic.



So? Many Christians are violent, and many Muslims are terrorists. It doesn't mean that Christianity or Islam are violent in and of themselves.

I'm very disappointed with you. That's all I have to say right now. You go ahead and continue white knighting and defending a stale, hateful ideology (2nd wave radical feminism), though. Maybe you'll get your brownie points, after all.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm very disappointed with you. That's all I have to say right now. You go ahead and continue white knighting and defending a stale, hateful ideology (2nd wave radical feminism), though. Maybe you'll get your brownie points, after all.

Disappointed because I have preferences in who I date? Sorry to disappoint you, then, but I'll continue doing so for the foreseeable future.

Finally the "white knighting" card came out. For someone who was just earlier saying that "victims shouldn't remain victims," you sure are pulling the victim card quite forcefully right now.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Disappointed because I have preferences in who I date? Sorry to disappoint you, then, but I'll continue doing so for the foreseeable future.

Finally the "white knighting" card came out. For someone who was just earlier saying that "victims shouldn't remain victims," you sure are pulling the victim card quite forcefully right now.

Please unfollow me.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Please unfollow me.

I don't take orders. Thank you.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I don't take orders. Thank you.

Whatever you say. I've unfollowed you. You've really shown a side of yourself that I've never seen before, that's for sure. Very sad.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Whatever you say. I've unfollowed you. You've really shown a side of yourself that I've never seen before, that's for sure. Very sad.

Because I said I wouldn't date a person with a penis?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Because I said I wouldn't date a person with a penis?

Because for someone who seems so into social justice, you sure aren't seeing how transphobic you're being. I already kinda covered why it's transphobic a few pages back in a reply to @Horrorble.

And, yes - rejecting non-white people or other racial groups out of hand is usually rooted in racism.