The plight of the Kagatob

paulgiamatti · #1 01-14-2015, 08:29 PM

Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism

"He doesn’t talk about anyone targeting or harassing him personally — indeed, how could he be targeted by books written by second-wave feminists when he was a toddler? — but of feeling targeted, of having an accusatory voice inside his mind tormenting him with a pervasive sense of inadequacy, uncleanness, wrongness. It doesn’t seem like anyone in his life was particularly giving him a hard time, but that he was giving himself a hard time and picking up on any critical or negative messages directed at men in general as a way to amplify his negative thoughts."

Troubled · #2 01-14-2015, 08:31 PM

katrik · #3 01-14-2015, 08:47 PM

Feminism sucks.

loramin · #4 01-14-2015, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by paulgiamatti [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why so many awkward, shy guys end up hating feminism

Salon has some great articles and some super click-bait-y articles, but this was definitely one of the good ones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by katrik [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Feminism sucks.

Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.

Rivthis · #5 01-14-2015, 10:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.

That is true if those in the 50s stayed true to their cause, now the cause has just been hijacked by people that want power and money.

Fuck Feminists..... they need a good dicking over

paulgiamatti · #6 01-14-2015, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Feminism is just believing that women and men deserve equal rights; unless you're still living in the 50s you're probably a feminist.

I can agree with this, but at the same time it seems like as feminism as a movement progresses and encroaches upon new frontiers, there becomes less ground to cover and the movement necessarily becomes more radicalized in the process. I think what the author was mainly trying to say is that people like Scott Aaronson are scrutinizing a very niche, very radical and very Dworkinesque take on feminism, when in reality none of the people he associates with would agree with her viewpoints or perhaps even claim to be feminists at all.

In today's internet age, where the writing of Andrea Dworkin can be easily popularized and widely disseminated, it's not difficult to find it being hailed as scripture and reblogged and quoted out of context where a more moderate and pragmatic application of feminism would be more appropriate, and more digestible. It's easy to see why a very large part of the feminist movement has become driven by an in-group/out-group kind of mentality - you're either with them or against them - and why there is such an astounding level of reproach the likes of which we saw in GamerGate and continue to see in various forums such as Reddit's men's rights advocacy.

That's not to say extreme feminism isn't necessary in its own regard; in the face oppression and subjugation and an unquestionably patriarchal society, it is the most appropriate response. Does that mean every woman's experience with these things is the same as Andrea Dworkin's? Absolutely not. Does it mean every man's experience with women is the same? Do I need to answer that question?