Why I'm Not A "Feminist"

[Robert.Evans]

So it's OK to single out the problems of women, but the problems of men should only be a portion of the larger picture?
This seems an unreasonable gender based restriction on discussion here.

This is one take on that difficult discussion on risk mitigation. But the many objections to this discussion are harmful because they discourage taking responsibility for one's own safety. Think of how rape is so common by those known to one, and yet some feminists here poo poo the suggestion to avoid getting drunk in risky situations. Feminist culture is itself at times quite dangerous to people.

quite so

 

[Robert.Evans]

You didn't read the part where I said that the discussion about violence against men needs to be included?

C'mon, Rev. We've had this discussion before. If you want to focus on the 15% rather than the large picture that includes that 15%, go ahead. But then you can't say that you're that concerned about the larger picture.

The point is that you can't be a feminist and then say you are bothered about men, because by definition you are not

 

[Robert.Evans]

So many presumptions & deductions reaching broad conclusions.

most things generalise ...there are always other reasons

 

[Robert.Evans]

Not to mention, of course, the whole argument of "Well, she didn't deserve to get raped....BUT....she should have _________."

Yes she should.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Where does "male supremacist" come from? Is the hammer the same as the chisel? Perhaps you argue that the hammer is greater as it strikes the chisel, but does not the chisel leave the marks? Where is the equality? Are they not different? If you same they are equal, then I would not like to borrow your tools

You didn't answer my question: What would you say your views are based on? Because, quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if you came out and said that you had been sarcastic all along. I kind of hope you are just joking, but I also realize that the kind of views you have been supporting here are hardly uncommon, sadly.

The point is that you can't be a feminist and then say you are bothered about men, because by definition you are not

Not really. I'm perfectly fine self-identifying as a feminist and caring about my own rights as well.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I did read it. I'm objecting to the idea that men's needs shouldn't be
singled out (as women's needs are), but should only be "included".
This speaks to the common feminist contention that the MRM should
not exist because feminism takes care of it. I don't buy that argument,
& even list this problem in the OP as one reason I'm not a "feminist".

I'm talking intimate partner violence. And no, I didn't say that feminism was taking care of everything. The CDC doesn't suggest that male victims of domestic violence are an afterthought of feminism, and feminism doesn't say that either, in spite of your misunderstandings of it.

If 15% of some problem is of particular concern to me, then I'll focus upon it. If it's too insignificant for you to separate it, then that would be how you would handle it.
But "15%" is a meaningless number when not applied to anything.

It's a figure we argued about before in regards to the statistics on rape. I suggested that the overwhelming majority of sexual assault cases occur by people the victims know and trust.

Not women, not men. People.

The response I get?

"Yeah, so what? We need to focus on what women can do to not get raped."

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I have no idea what the first part of that meant. We are not supposed to kill and we supposed to treat others as we would wish to be treated. But we are different. Where is the thread on this forum that says we should beat wives? I don't think there will be one. And I think, for you info, that men are assaulted in general more than women. It is just perceived more to be women, as you always think of yourselves more.

The point is that you can't be a feminist and then say you are bothered about men, because by definition you are not

You know, I've been accused of this before, and not just by you. It's untrue, in spite of how I've argued for the benefit of my 3 sons and my husband and for men's issues regarding domestic violence against them, custody issues, and male victims of rape. But no matter...

Oh, and a quick search on the forums will give you what you're looking for in regards to threads that advocate for disciplining wives for the purpose of keeping them in line.

Yes she should.

Funny...our house was burglarized once - I even started a thread on here several years ago - and not once were we ever approached by anyone who mentioned how we should have taken more responsibility, or that we in any way put ourselves in a position to be burglarized. The case squad that was investigating the string of burglaries in our neighborhood never asked us if we left our doors unlocked, if we put our valuables out for everyone to see, or if we just weren't paying attention to any suspicious people in the neighborhood.

What's interesting about all of that is in the 7 years or so since we've been burglarized, I've never come across arguments for why the perpetrators were somehow enticed by our actions, or by how we presented our house to others.

But rape victims - and in particular female rape victims (which I don't think we should just focus on, as I think male victims of rape ought to be considered as well) - are told how they need to take some responsibility in their assault. How they should have known better.

What you are demonstrating, R.E, is rape apologetic rhetoric. And it doesn't alleviate nor solve the problem.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm talking intimate partner violence. And no, I didn't say that feminism was taking care of everything. The CDC doesn't suggest that male victims of domestic violence are an afterthought of feminism, and feminism doesn't say that either, in spite of your misunderstandings of it.

My misunderstanding of it, eh? You see feminist culture as one thing, ie, as your own positive interpretation of it. I see that too, but I also see other elements, warts & all. To deny that many feminists dismiss MRAs as unnecessary, selfish & whiny misogynists is to don rose colored glasses & deny the reality that feminist culture is diverse...& some of it offensive.

It's a figure we argued about before in regards to the statistics on rape. I suggested that the overwhelming majority of sexual assault cases occur by people the victims know and trust.
Not women, not men. People.
The response I get?
"Yeah, so what? We need to focus on what women can do to not get raped."

As a libertarian, I'm concerned about civil liberty loss & violent assault...not just rape among intimates. You find the latter of overwhelming significance, thereby requiring that men's issues not be singled out. I disagree. Let each person single out that which concerns one. And where there is common ground, the various movements may work in concert. But that won't happen as much as it could if each side dismisses the other as whiny, insignificant or misogynist/misandrist.

Edit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_and_crime

Males were more likely to be murder victims (76.8%).[9]
Females were most likely to be victims of domestic homicides (63.7%) and sex-related homicides (81.7%)[10]
Males were most likely to be victims of drug- (90.5%) and gang-related homicides (94.6%).[11]

Anecdotally, I've had to fend off violent assault several times, but Mrs Revolt has not ever had to.

Some might argue that if men assault men, this isn't much of a problem because it's within one group.
I have a vastly different perspective, ie, they're in 2 distinctly separate groups: 1) Thugs & 2) Innocent people

 

[Robert.Evans]

You didn't answer my question: What would you say your views are based on? Because, quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if you came out and said that you had been sarcastic all along. I kind of hope you are just joking, but I also realize that the kind of views you have been supporting here are hardly uncommon, sadly.



Not really. I'm perfectly fine self-identifying as a feminist and caring about my own rights as well.

Based on....scripture and life.

So you care about women not men then

 

[Robert.Evans]

It's a figure we argued about before in regards to the statistics on rape. I suggested that the overwhelming majority of sexual assault cases occur by people the victims know and trust.

Not women, not men. People.

yes, agree

 

[Robert.Evans]

You know, I've been accused of this before, and not just by you. It's untrue, in spite of how I've argued for the benefit of my 3 sons and my husband and for men's issues regarding domestic violence against them, custody issues, and male victims of rape. But no matter...

accused.....if you are a feminist you cannot be thinking of men. period. Otherwise you would not be feminist and then would do what you seem to be saying, which is, thinking about people.

Oh, and a quick search on the forums will give you what you're looking for in regards to threads that advocate for disciplining wives for the purpose of keeping them in line.

surprised indeed

Funny...our house was burglarized once - I even started a thread on here several years ago - and not once were we ever approached by anyone who mentioned how we should have taken more responsibility, or that we in any way put ourselves in a position to be burglarized. The case squad that was investigating the string of burglaries in our neighborhood never asked us if we left our doors unlocked, if we put our valuables out for everyone to see, or if we just weren't paying attention to any suspicious people in the neighborhood.

What's interesting about all of that is in the 7 years or so since we've been burglarized, I've never come across arguments for why the perpetrators were somehow enticed by our actions, or by how we presented our house to others.

But rape victims - and in particular female rape victims (which I don't think we should just focus on, as I think male victims of rape ought to be considered as well) - are told how they need to take some responsibility in their assault. How they should have known better.

What you are demonstrating, R.E, is rape apologetic rhetoric. And it doesn't alleviate nor solve the problem.

I have mentioned that very analogy in the 'rape' thread that is now locked. We are not supposed to kill, rape, steal etc, as it is written, but that means that you trust everyone to look after YOUR best interest? Surely you have locks on your doors. That is probably why they never said anything. Or did you not perhaps?

 

[Willamena]

accused.....if you are a feminist you cannot be thinking of men. period. Otherwise you would not be feminist and then would do what you seem to be saying, which is, thinking about people.

I have heard this view before, expressed by a person from the UK, but it makes no sense in the Americas. Feminism here is simply advocacy for women's rights, and anybody can do that.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

accused.....if you are a feminist you cannot be thinking of men. period. Otherwise you would not be feminist and then would do what you seem to be saying, which is, thinking about people.

LOL I know what's in my mind and what I advocate for in my activism. I'm quite sure I've spoken up and written to our legislators about equality in Selective Service - which right now only legally requires our sons to sign up for the draft. My sons are just as valuable as my daughter in my eyes. I'd prefer it if the government is going to see our young men as disposable soldiers, then they should take our daughters, too, or abolish Selective Service entirely.

But I'm still a feminist. :yes:

I have mentioned that very analogy in the 'rape' thread that is now locked. We are not supposed to kill, rape, steal etc, as it is written, but that means that you trust everyone to look after YOUR best interest? Surely you have locks on your doors. That is probably why they never said anything. Or did you not perhaps?

Our house was locked up. It was a string of burglaries in our neighborhood when the power was out on the entire grid after a week long ice storm. The burglars broke through one of our windows while we were gone and went through every room of the house. The investigators said that the houses that were hit were the ones without heat and electricity, which included ours.

 

[Robert.Evans]

I have heard this view before, expressed by a person from the UK, but it makes no sense in the Americas. Feminism here is simply advocacy for women's rights, and anybody can do that.

Women's rights to do what?

 

[Willamena]

Women's rights to do what?

Women's rights.

 

[Robert.Evans]

LOL I know what's in my mind and what I advocate for in my activism. I'm quite sure I've spoken up and written to our legislators about equality in Selective Service - which right now only legally requires our sons to sign up for the draft. My sons are just as valuable as my daughter in my eyes. I'd prefer it if the government is going to see our young men as disposable soldiers, then they should take our daughters, too, or abolish Selective Service entirely.

But I'm still a feminist.

then you are not bothered about men, even if you say you are. You mention your boys, but that is your family

Our house was locked up. It was a string of burglaries in our neighborhood when the power was out on the entire grid after a week long ice storm. The burglars broke through one of our windows while we were gone and went through every room of the house. The investigators said that the houses that were hit were the ones without heat and electricity, which included ours.

I said i had mentioned it before, I had. Interesting that they should target your house, as others, that were easier to break into. No doubt when it comes to rape, you would not view that the same. Appearances don't seem to matter then eh.

 

[Robert.Evans]

Women's rights.

to do what?

 

[Willamena]

to do what?

"Women's rights" are a classification rights. I don't want to have to start from scratch and explain what they are.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

then you are not bothered about men, even if you say you are. You mention your boys, but that is your family

They are men. And I stand for their well-being as men in our society.

I said i had mentioned it before, I had. Interesting that they should target your house, as others, that were easier to break into. No doubt when it comes to rape, you would not view that the same. Appearances don't seem to matter then eh.

It's not appearances, it's about vulnerability. How people dress (unless it's restrictive clothing) doesn't make for vulnerability as much as being meek, shoulders slumped, or being tied up, passed out, or sleeping.

 

[Robert.Evans]

They are men. And I stand for their well-being as men in our society.

they are family

It's not appearances, it's about vulnerability. How people dress (unless it's restrictive clothing) doesn't make for vulnerability as much as being meek, shoulders slumped, or being tied up, passed out, or sleeping.

I agree per se, but it is also about appearances in some instances. There are gangs in London which i mentioned before, which use one of their members girl as they wish, whether they object or not. You think they look for an old hag?

You think that there has never been a rape committed because of the way she or he looked. Really?