# Where is the radical feminism?



## Faithful Wife

I went searching today for videos by radical feminists. I wanted to see why so many MRA/MGTOW types have so much to say about them. I figured wow, they must be out there everywhere! Since the red pill movement is so vocal, I thought for sure that radical feminists must be just as vocal (and silly) because supposedly, that's what red pill is responding to.

But I couldn't find any. All I found was page after page after page of MRA/MGTOW types endlessly insulting and demonizing feminists.

So if any of you know of any radical feminist videos, could you share them? I'm talking about videos of feminists themselves making man-hating diatribes, not about women-hating red pillers whining about women. 

Thanks. I am just trying to find out what the red pill team is so upset about, because frankly, all I see are them telling each other how horrible feminists are, but I don't see feminists telling each other how horrible men are. I'd also like to see videos made recently, not old stuff. The point being that since supposedly these radical feminists are blatently pushing an agenda "everywhere" according to red pill, why can't I seem to find them easily?


----------



## eastsouth2000

Faithful Wife said:


> *but I don't see feminists telling each other how horrible men are.*


strange seem to find it all over the web.

you find that every where in the internet.
try xojane or jezebel

seen a lot of videos on the net.
what interested my lately was "the cat calling nyc"

mgtow most are men who got burned.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Links? Examples? I do not know what specific videos you mean. The street harassment in NYC said nothing about radical feminism from what I remember, but feel free to post a link again, I don't know where it is or who made it. I just remember it was posted here once.


----------



## seeking sanity

Google "Radical Feminist Blog" and you'll get a bunch. 

I don't believe their issue is with "radical" feminists, it's with the overall narrative around white men being oppressors. I was talking to my daughter about this today (she thinks I'm too conservative). I used two examples:

1. Women make less money than men. According to noted Economist Thomas Sowell - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_sGn6PdmIo - when you look at what "never married women" versus "never married men" make, women actually come out ahead. The real story is that motherhood is the main thing that drives income disparity because a women who takes time off to raise kids naturally has less time to rise in the work force.

2. I read a lot of complaining about how "patriarchy" and "racism" are everywhere, but I don't see is a description of what a non-patriarchal society looks and feels like. I've personally found that complaining is not very productive and I'd much rather move on to solution.

And then there is stuff like...

Guess why this school district wants to get rid of the game of ?tag? - The Washington Post

UN Wants To Censor Internet To Save Feminists' Feelings

Feminists are angry that Kermit the Frog's new girlfriend is young and thin - Telegraph

All of which makes a regular fella what to punch someone.

I think it's a combination of feminist's perceived overly sensitive, socialist leanings, suck the fun out of the world, sentiments that drives men to those movements. 

This gal has some great video's deconstructing feminist "truths". She's articulate and credible.
Christina Hoff Sommers » AEI Scholar

That's my take.


----------



## seeking sanity

Another example: "1 in 5 women are sexually assaulted at college."

This stat is complete b*ll****. My daughter is in her first year of college and if I thought she had a 1 in 5 chance of being sexually assaulted, she sure a heck would NOT be there. 

The most likely stat is about 1 in 65 I believe, which is slightly lower than the national average. It's still terrible, but what has happened is that the Obama admin has used the 1 in 5 stat to create changes to Title IX, which basic dictate colleges to become courts, leading to all manner of misjustice:

False Rape Accusation

Matthew Kaiser: Some Consent Rules are "Unfair to Male Students"

So you get a situation where if a college women has a single drink, and hooks up with a guy and later regrets it, he can be kicked out of college because he "raped" her. It's a one way door that puts the liability and onus on the man, and treats the women like a victim.

So, the radical feminists are easily ignored because they are as crazy as any other radical anything. But public policy is being dictated by untruths that penalize men for their gender. That's the reason for the push back by these men's groups.


----------



## tech-novelist

Not videos, but quotations from feminists. Enjoy!

Radical Feminist Quotes.. Clinically Insane People... : I Haven't Lost My Virginity Story & Experience


----------



## tech-novelist

How about this gem?

If I Admit That 'Hating Men' Is a Thing, Will You Stop Turning It Into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?


----------



## tech-novelist

With "friends" like this, who needs enemies?

Feminists don't hate men. But it wouldn't matter if we did | Jessica Valenti | Comment is free | The Guardian


----------



## Faithful Wife

I did open and read or listen to at least some of all of these links...yet I don't see any raging videos by radical feminists. A whole lot of others talking about how wrong feminism is, and a list of quotes by feminists assembled in one list.

Still not seeing what MGTOW and the likes are saying. They claim that rad fem is out there everywhere pushing men down.

These few links are only about 1/100th of the amount of links I could come up with of MGTOW and their likes...how come the push down is so hard in one direction?

Yes tech, some of those quotes are pretty off base. Yet there are not wide spread loudly screeching rad fems at every turn or we would easily be able to find link after link after link of angry raging feminists delivering diatribes all over youtube.

Anyone else?


----------



## tech-novelist

Men aren't entitled to the presumption of innocence when a woman claims rape:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...-we-should-automatically-believe-rape-claims/


----------



## tech-novelist

Exactly what search term should we use to look for videos, "Angry raging feminists"? Somehow I doubt anyone would describe a video that they post in that way.

But the real problem isn't the lunatic fringe of feminism; it's the legal system, which is being used to harm men every day.

What most MRAs want is legal equality for men, not just in theory but in practice.

What does that mean?

For starters:
No debtor's prison for men who fall behind in child support payments.
Mandatory accounting for how child support payments are spent, with harsh penalties for fraud.
Default joint custody in divorce.
No longer throwing men in jail because a woman calls the police and says "I'm frightened" without any evidence of harm.
Repeal VAWA, IMBRA, Title IX, and every other law that privileges women at the expense of men.
Repeal "guilty until proven innocent" laws like "Yes means yes" in California.
Allow men and women to make their own marriage contracts that will be upheld like every other type of contract.
Subject women to the draft as men are.

That should take care of most of the major ones. Once that is done, MRAs will be finished with their work and can go back to their other interests.


----------



## jld

technovelist said:


> With "friends" like this, who needs enemies?
> 
> Feminists don't hate men. But it wouldn't matter if we did | Jessica Valenti | Comment is free | The Guardian


From the article:

*"When women hate men, we hurt their feelings. When men hate women, they kill us*_: mass shootings have been attributed to misogyny, and sexual and domestic violence against women is often fuelled by a hatred for women."_


----------



## tech-novelist

jld said:


> From the article:
> 
> *"When women hate men, we hurt their feelings. When men hate women, they kill us*_: mass shootings have been attributed to misogyny, and sexual and domestic violence against women is often fuelled by a hatred for women."_


So let me see if I have this right:
1. All MRAs hate women. (Even the female ones? Never mind that!)
2. "When men hate women, they kill us" (see above)
3. Therefore, all MRAs kill women!

Can't argue with logic like that!

And of course no woman has ever killed a man...


----------



## tech-novelist

Here's an angry raging feminist video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80


----------



## tech-novelist

And here's a satirical look at this issue, from another woman:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ji4t7HhIjw


----------



## Faithful Wife

technovelist said:


> Here's an angry raging feminist video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80


I would agree she is angry, raging and a feminist. It looks like she is clearly boobs-deep in the mra/fem wars and is trying to go to bat for her team. But she can't keep her cool at all which makes it impossible to actually hear her message.


----------



## Faithful Wife

technovelist said:


> And here's a satirical look at this issue, from another woman:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ji4t7HhIjw


This is just a woman b*tching about other women, IMO.

I did appreciate the last one which was actually a raging feminist.


----------



## Starstarfish

> Subject women to the draft as men are.


I'd be all for that if sexual assault wasn't such a problem in our military. 

So isn't the second best option, stop the men having to register with the Draft and the Selective Service?


----------



## Starstarfish

> No longer throwing men in jail because a woman calls the police and says "I'm frightened" without any evidence of harm.


What are we defining as harm? Please let them actually stab you first, it makes the paper work so much easier. 

Also, if your relationship is at that point, maybe going to jail to make you finally realize that this whole this is beyond hope is useful.


----------



## Faithful Wife

technovelist said:


> Exactly what search term should we use to look for videos, "Angry raging feminists"? Somehow I doubt anyone would describe a video that they post in that way.
> 
> But the real problem isn't the lunatic fringe of feminism; it's the legal system, which is being used to harm men every day.


If the real problem is the legal system, then why do you talk so much about the unfairness of the top 20% of men getting all the ladies?

For the HUGE numbers of angry raging men talking about how horrible radical feminists are (including much more than just issues with the legal system), I would have thought it would be easy to find a similar amount of raging radical feminists being horrible. I did appreciate the one video you found me...but seriously, I am just taken aback by the VOLUME of men going off on so many tangents about feminism and feminists. If this is supposedly happening in response to radfems, I don't see it.


----------



## Garro

While not a radical feminist I love what Jenna Marbles one of the most popular people on YT says:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uowRdnLRt3I

She speaks the truth! Not related but also love this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EElTg4tFqXc

I am a long time subscriber.


----------



## EleGirl

technovelist said:


> Here's an angry raging feminist video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvYyGTmcP80


Your posting this video as proof of how horrible feminists are is hilarious. Yes eh woman using suing the f’word like crazy. That that’s a bit rough. But welcome to 2013. I thought that F’word is just normal English now… it’s used on this form constantly. 

This woman is trying to tell the MRA men who are filming her, that feminists agree with a long list of things that MRAs want to see… But apparently the last thing they want to hear is that feminists agree on many points. But the MRA crowd keep trying to talk over her and shut her up. They clearly do not wat her to have her say… I suppose because she does agree with their points. That’s why she’s getting loud. Obviously the MRA guys are not interested in actually talking the issues and working together with women. They just want to show the woman as a raging feminist. 

Here are the points that she is trying to make.. the points that she has to yell to make..

1)	Feminists do not want you to lose custody of your children, assuming that woman are naturally better care givers is part of patriarchy.

2)	Feminists do not like commercials in which bumbling dads mess up the laundry, and competent wives have to bustle in and fix it.

3)	Feminists do not want to you to have to make alimony payments. Alimony is set up to combat the fact that women have historically been expected to prioritize domestic duties over professional goals thus minimizing their earning potential when traditional marriages end. The expectation that wives should make babies instead of money is part of patriarchy.

4)	Feminist do not want anyone to be raped in prison. Permissiveness and jokes about prison rape are part of the rape culture. Rape culture is part of is part of patriarchy.


5)	Feminists do not want anyone to be falsely accused of rape. False rape accusations discredit rape victims which reinforce rape culture which is part of patriarchy.

6)	Feminists do not want to be lonely, we do not hate nice guys. The idea that some people are inherently more evaluable than other people because of physical attributes is part of patriarchy.

7)	Feminists do not want you to have to pay for dinner, we want to achieve financial independence.

One comment that she made pretty much defines the way that the MRA group is reacting to her words….

“We are trying to work on the same things that you are working on, but you are too busy hating women that you cannot see that we are trying to actually work those same situations.

This woman is “angry” and “raging” because she is trying to tell the men that she agrees with them and wants to work with them in fixing a lot of the issues that they bring up. Why do they want to shut her up?

Women here have TAM, who identify as feminists, have said the same things she did and a lot more that is in support of true equality. When we do, it seems to go through one ear and out the other with a lost of the men here who are MRA supporters. Why?


----------



## EleGirl

Garro said:


> While not a radical feminist I love what Jenna Marbles one of the most popular people on YT says:
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uowRdnLRt3I
> 
> 
> She speaks the truth!


Wow!! If she had friends who are like what she describes, all I can say that she should get some better friends. I certainly would not associate with women who had that attitude.

I don't know any woman who has that attitude. I'm sure that there are some like that just as there are some pretty lousy men out there too.

But to paint all women who call themselves feminists as she does is just nonsense. 




Garro said:


> Not related but also love this video:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EElTg4tFqXc
> 
> I am a long time subscriber.


Funny... but not relevant to this thread... or maybe she is a raging feminist???? She does use the F'word a lot... foul mouthed? Must be a feminist.. .yep. >


----------



## Anon Pink

OMG this is hilarious!



technovelist said:


> Not videos, but quotations from feminists. Enjoy!
> 
> Radical Feminist Quotes.. Clinically Insane People... : I Haven't Lost My Virginity Story & Experience


I took the very first quote on this list of quotes, which was rather offensive. But I'd never heard of the author of this quite so I did a Google search. And I got two full Google pages of essentially anti feminist quotes and nowhere was the link to the supposed author of this supposed quote. Just a bunch of pages decrying this and other feminist quotes. 

Not feminist rantings.
NEXT!




technovelist said:


> How about this gem?
> 
> If I Admit That 'Hating Men' Is a Thing, Will You Stop Turning It Into a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy?


Yes, quite a gem actually. The article discusses that the problems men face, and blame on feminism, are actually human problems and not discriminatory problems. This article doesn't denigrate men as a class or as a gender, it makes fun of the red pill cry babies who blame everything on women.

Again, not rabid feminist rantings...
NEXT!




technovelist said:


> With "friends" like this, who needs enemies?
> 
> Feminists don't hate men. But it wouldn't matter if we did | Jessica Valenti | Comment is free | The Guardian


Now this one was actually a very good article here is the first paragraph.

"One of the most common derisive taunts thrown at feminists – and one of the oldest – is “manhater”. It’s been around since the days of suffrage, and still gets used today, though its a pretty anodyne insult. Most feminists, like me, shun the label and work to convince people that despite the stereotypes feminists absolutely, without a doubt, do not hate men."

The OP on this thread asked for links to feminist rantings and you've posted 3 links that are not feminist rantings and do not discuss am hating topics but discuss how antifeminists accuse feminists of saying and doing things we don't say or do!


----------



## Anon Pink

So I've just been googling trying to find angry feminists rantings in which men are being denigrated and all I've come up with are arguments about angry men ranting about feminism.

Wa wa wa ....


----------



## always_alone

As I suspected: If you really want to find a radical feminist, you pretty much have to go back to 1982 (or before). And they weren't making videos back then.


----------



## Anon Pink

technovelist said:


> What most MRAs want is legal equality for men, not just in theory but in practice.
> 
> What does that mean?
> 
> For starters:
> No debtor's prison for men who fall behind in child support payments.
> 
> But it's okay to imprison women who fall behind in child support payments? Sorry but if a parent falls behind on child support payments there needs to be serious consequences as not only a deterrent but also to protect the state. Custodial parents generally go to the state for help affording their children when the noncustodial parent turns his or her back.
> 
> 
> Mandatory accounting for how child support payments are spent, with harsh penalties for fraud.
> 
> So if a custodial parent uses a portion of the child support payment to purchase dishes would this be fraud? What if some of the money goes toward cay payments? Is this fraud? Maybe you should define fraudulent use of child support payments? On principal, I agree that any parent who materially neglects the child while receiving money to support the child, say spends the money on booze and race track betting, should loose custody of the child.
> 
> Default joint custody in divorce.
> 
> I actually agree with this.
> 
> 
> No longer throwing men in jail because a woman calls the police and says "I'm frightened" without any evidence of harm.
> 
> Can you show stats from credible sources (IOW Not from MRA sources) in which this actually happens?
> 
> 
> Repeal VAWA, IMBRA, Title IX, and every other law that privileges women at the expense of men.
> 
> Are you fvcking kidding me? No, not gonna repeal any of this! For the billionth time, Title IX doesn't priveldge women at the expense of men, it STOPS the priveldge of men at the expense of women and mandates equal opportunity and equal spending. Don't like it? Tough sh!t!
> 
> 
> Repeal "guilty until proven innocent" laws like "Yes means yes" in California.
> 
> I am in support of affirmative consent laws.
> 
> 
> Allow men and women to make their own marriage contracts that will be upheld like every other type of contract.
> 
> This issue is far too complicated to refute in a paragraph. But essentially, a contract between two people has to show certain conditions were met in order for the contract to be upheld in court. During the course of a marriage those conditions frequently change and change drastically and that is why some prenups aren't enforceable.
> 
> 
> Subject women to the draft as men are.
> 
> This, I'm okay with.
> 
> 
> That should take care of most of the major ones. Once that is done, MRAs will be finished with their work and can go back to their other interests.


I guess this mean the MRA whiny pants will perpetually be at it...


----------



## tom67

In a nut shell
UN Wants To Censor Internet To Save Feminists' Feelings


----------



## GTdad

Like a lot of things, I don't know that I've ever seen "radical feminism" in real life, and I work in academia for heaven's sake.

And just like anything else I only see on the internet, I have some doubts as to whether it even exists. Certainly the extent to which it exists.

Is there likely some woman out there posting nonsense about men? Sure, just as there are myriad loons posting crap about somebody or something, but I suspect those posts are read by far more men looking to be outraged than by women who agree, which makes those posts little more than trolling.


----------



## always_alone

tom67 said:


> In a nut shell
> UN Wants To Censor Internet To Save Feminists' Feelings


Oooh, yeah, those out of control UN folks, what a crazy bunch of radical feminists. How dare they talk about increasing access for women and deterring stalking and sexual exploitation? Human rights? What a bunch of man-haters!


----------



## bfree

There are whack jobs of all genders. Notice I wrote ALL genders because I include trans and non gendered in there as well. The point is that when life turns to crap many people will shift the blame to who/whatever is handy.


----------



## farsidejunky

always_alone said:


> Oooh, yeah, those out of control UN folks, what a crazy bunch of radical feminists. How dare they talk about increasing access for women and deterring stalking and sexual exploitation? Human rights? What a bunch of man-haters!


Snark and sarcasm doesn't make the potential for abuse of free speech or unintended consequences from this proposal any less real.

Have you seen the list of the countries on the UN Human Rights Council? 

Saudi Arabia is on that commission, along with half a dozen other questionable countries.

Thank you, U.N., but I will pass.


----------



## always_alone

farsidejunky said:


> Snark and sarcasm doesn't make the potential for abuse of free speech or unintended consequences from this proposal any less real.
> 
> Have you seen the list of the countries on the UN Human Rights Council?
> 
> Saudi Arabia is on that commission, along with half a dozen other questionable countries.
> 
> Thank you, U.N., but I will pass.


Ah, yes, Saudi Arabia, also well known as the bastion of radical feminism.

I never said the UN was or should be immune from criticism. But to suggest they are pushing a radical feminist agenda? :rofl:


----------



## farsidejunky

always_alone said:


> Ah, yes, Saudi Arabia, also well known as the bastion of radical feminism.
> 
> I never said the UN was or should be immune from criticism. But to suggest they are pushing a radical feminist agenda? :rofl:


You completely misjudged my intent, through a false assumption, that I was defending the premise of the thread or somehow suggesting the U.N. is pushing a radical feminist agenda. That is a disrespectful judgement.


----------



## always_alone

farsidejunky said:


> You completely misjudged my intent, through a false assumption, that I was defending the premise of the thread or somehow suggesting the U.N. is pushing a radical feminist agenda. That is a disrespectful judgement.


I understood your intent. I was responding to the posted article that basically accuses the UN of pushing a feminist agenda of censorship to save "feminist feelings". 

To my mind, the only good response to that proposition is snark and sarcasm. 

As for other problems with the UN? Those are worthy of civilized discussion. But that the UN is advocating "clamping down on basic free speech provisions to insulate these delicate first-world feminist wallflowers from the consequences of their own purposefully provocative statements" (direct quote from the posted article) is ludicrous, especially if you bother to look at the original report, and doubly especially when you bring in considerations of who the UN is, as you just did.


----------



## Marduk

No videos... but a _lot_ of interviews.

Including the 'put men in concentration camps' one. But also including concepts such as 'gender is bad' and 'the law is part of the patriarchy' and 'women need to be separated from hetero society.'

To say that the nutters are taken seriously by many feminists would be a serious exaggeration.

But to say that they aren't given a voice, particularly by like-minded academics, would also be an exaggeration.

News ? RadFem Collective


----------



## bfree

I don't necessarily subscribe to any radical feminist agenda but since the original post requested a video showing what might be construed as radical feminism in action I'll submit this one for review.

https://youtu.be/iARHCxAMAO0


----------



## Cletus

A lack of rabid feminist videos, if there is one, might just be a result of their inability to use the remote properly.


----------



## jld

Cletus.


----------



## Cletus

jld said:


> Cletus.


Ok, I've been naughty. I probably deserve a spanking.


----------



## jld




----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> But to say that they aren't *given a voice*, particularly by like-minded academics, would also be an exaggeration.
> 
> News ? RadFem Collective


Checked out the website. It was very low key and understated. No raging videos about how much they hate men. Looks like a very, very small movement. I don't know how this tiny fraction could possibly be blamed for the hundreds upon hundreds of angry mob behavior videos ranting about how fat and unf*ckable radical feminists are and how they are ruining everything for men everywhere.

Furthermore, no one has the power to "give" anyone a voice. We each have a voice and may use it as we choose to.


----------



## Anon Pink

Cletus said:


> A lack of rabid feminist videos, if there is one, might just be a result of their inability to use the remote properly.


That is too funny!

I can't use the remote properly and I've given up trying. I don't get to hold it often enough to figure it out anyway.


----------



## gouge_away

RedPill seems to me like a guild of bitter men that are too afraid to confront their SOs, so the hide behind Reddit anonymity and vent like little b!tches.


----------



## Faithful Wife

gouge_away said:


> RedPill seems to me like a guild of bitter men that are too afraid to confront their SOs, so the hide behind Reddit anonymity and vent like little b!tches.


I think most of them don't have SO's. But of the ones who do, yeah I agree.


----------



## jld

Anon Pink said:


> That is too funny!
> 
> I can't use the remote properly and I've given up trying. I don't get to hold it often enough to figure it out anyway.


You and me, both, sister.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Checked out the website. It was very low key and understated. No raging videos about how much they hate men. Looks like a very, very small movement. I don't know how this tiny fraction could possibly be blamed for the hundreds upon hundreds of angry mob behavior videos ranting about how fat and unf*ckable radical feminists are and how they are ruining everything for men everywhere.
> 
> Furthermore, no one has the power to "give" anyone a voice. We each have a voice and may use it as we choose to.


Here's the thing that I think is driving some of the guys nuts about all of this FW...

Academia has this understated nature to it. It's part of how it works: to put things out there in such a way as to say something contraversial, without actually saying it. Implying it. Undermining it. Edging around things.

I could post more of this kind of thing... and I'm the first one to say that the anti-male version of feminism is mostly ignored...

But it is still there. Condoned, in a way, because it is not treated forthrightly by feminism as a whole, sometimes.

I am not saying that this is a giant conspiracy and is going to change anything. But what I am saying is that in academia anyway, there is very much a sense of apologism for the anti-male sentiment by some, that allows it to exist and be tolerated.

Which is what drives some guys crazy, because if you tolerate it, then maybe you condone it.

I think that if you're going to understand why it makes some guys mad, you kind of have to accept that there is a problem there, even if it is far smaller and impactful than some of those think it is.

Regarding giving people a voice, this is the stated purpose of women's studies as a field of endeavor: to give women a voice. Implying, of course, that it has been taken away.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Ok well...I'm going to watch the video in post #37 later tonight...but from what I have been able to gather here, I was correct in my assumption that there is not a gigantic, powerful, scathing and hateful radical feminist agenda that the MRA's are "responding to", which is what the MRA claim. If there was such a movement, it would be easy to find evidence of it, especially after asking for it on an open thread like this.

So therefore, my other assumption that MRA's and their tandem groups like MGTOW are out there by themselves, fighting directly against women in general, not against radical feminists.

I have questioned the mindset and words of these guys before many times, and the answer I kept getting back from a lot of guys was "what they are saying isn't any worse than what the radical feminists are saying", which sounded reasonable. But what radical feminists? Where? Who are they and what are they saying that is just as bad as these guys? When I actually started looking for that radical feminist agenda, I couldn't find it. I can't even find a fraction of the amount of regular feminist agenda stuff compared to the MASSIVE amount of radical, hateful, and dangerous men who straight up hate women.

Now I'm not talking about anyone at TAM here, I don't know if anyone actually hates women or not. But the MRA group is a hate group IMO, and there's no excuse for it and no other way to describe them.

Thankfully, men who want to improve the world for themselves AND for women, their children, and everyone else are far more abundant than the screeching radical crazies at MRA groups. They just don't post thousands of ranting videos that make themselves look like idiots, so it may seem there are fewer of them than there are crazy MRA's. Instead they are good fathers, good husbands, good citizens, and good people with no need to stir up hatred in others.

Peace.


----------



## Marduk

While I like what you are saying FW, I don't think you are done.



> Some radical feminists called[7] for women to govern women and men, among them Andrea Dworkin,[8] Phyllis Chesler,[9] Monique Wittig (in fiction),[10] Mary Daly,[11] Jill Johnston,[12] and Robin Morgan.[13]


and


> Redstockings and The Feminists were both radical feminist organizations, but held rather distinct views. Most members of Redstockings held to a materialist and anti-psychologistic view. They viewed men's oppression of women as ongoing and deliberate, holding individual men responsible for this oppression, viewing institutions and systems (including the family) as mere vehicles of conscious male intent, and rejecting psychologistic explanations of female submissiveness as blaming women for collaboration in their own oppression.[25] They held to a view—which Willis would later describe as "neo-Maoist"[21]—that it would be possible to unite all or virtually all women, as a class, to confront this oppression by personally confronting men.[26]


and


> The New York Radical Feminists (NYRF) took a more psychologistic (and even biologically determinist) line. They argued that men dominated women not so much for material benefits as for the ego satisfaction intrinsic in domination. Similarly, they rejected the Redstockings view that women submitted only out of necessity or The Feminists' implicit view that they submitted out of cowardice, but instead argued that social conditioning simply led most women to accept a submissive role as "right and natural".[29]


and


> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism
> 
> There is a wide list of radical feminist thinkers posted at the bottom of the page.
> 
> One can argue about the size or effective power these groups have, but not that they exist, or that some of their stated purposes are anti-male... or in fact, anti-trans, anti-gay (if male), or even anti-female if they choose to marry men.
> 
> What strikes me as so much the case with radical feminism is that it seems to define itself by what it is against, rather than what it is for. Egalitarian feminism, for example, is for equality -- not being better than, just being equal to.


----------



## gouge_away

Is egalitarianism a feminist movement? What is the difference between egalitarianism and feminist egalitarianism?


----------



## Faithful Wife

Nah Marduk, I'm good. I found what I was looking for....or rather, the lack of it.

I'm not here to argue about the position of feminism. I was here to find those examples of raging, man-hating radical feminists that are supposedly in equal step with raging, woman hating MRA's. And it just isn't there. Period.

Mods you can close the thread if you want.


----------



## Marduk

gouge_away said:


> Is egalitarianism a feminist movement? What is the difference between egalitarianism and feminist egalitarianism?


Egalitarianism is a philosophy that everyone is equal.

Egalitarian feminism (or equality feminism) is:


> Equality feminism is a subset of the overall feminism movement that focuses on the basic similarities between men and women, and whose ultimate goal is the equality of the sexes in all domains. This includes economic and political equality, equal access within the workplace, freedom from oppressive gender stereotyping, and an androgynous worldview.[1]
> 
> Feminist theory seeks to promote the status of women as equal and undifferentiated from men. While equality feminists largely agree that men and women have basic biological differences in anatomy and frame, they argue that on a psychological level, the use of ration or reason is androgynous. For equality feminists, men and women are equal in terms of their ability to reason, achieve goals, and prosper in both the work and home front.


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equality_feminism

Which my thinking mostly aligns with.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Nah Marduk, I'm good. I found what I was looking for....or rather, the lack of it.
> 
> I'm not here to argue about the position of feminism. I was here to find those examples of raging, man-hating radical feminists that are supposedly in equal step with raging, woman hating MRA's. And it just isn't there. Period.
> 
> Mods you can close the thread if you want.


Hmm. I would not agree with you in that assessment that it is not there.

But if you want to stop talking about it, that's ok.


----------



## EleGirl

tom67 said:


> In a nut shell
> UN Wants To Censor Internet To Save Feminists' Feelings


If what they are campaigning the UN to do is what that article says, then that's stupid. I doubt it will go anywhere.

But, before I accept what the article says the women (and others want), I would like to see what the women (and others) actually said. My experience is that there are a lot of articles on the internet that basically twist what others say to the point that, well they are lying.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Marduk, Where are the examples of raging, man hating feminism that MRA's are supposedly responding to? They aren't there, or they are so hard to find that they are only a fraction of the MRA scathing, woman hating propaganda. 

What I was told several times by men who justify the MRA constant hateful screeching woman hating diatribes was that it was "no worse than what the radfems say" and that it was in response to what the radfems say. My bad, I assumed that meant that there was a sizable amount of horrible, man hating radfem screech fests. But there isn't. There are 10,000 MRA screech films there at a quick google search, but maybe just 1 screeching radfem film or video.

Again, that was my own problem apparently....because I assumed there was more of it. But apparently the 1/10,000 ratio is enough radical feminism for these MRA hate groups to feel justified in making their hateful propaganda.

And none of this means I don't feel men have rights or that I am a radical raging feminist myself. I was just saddened and curious about the ENORMOUS amount of hateful videos and had been told it was "in response" to radfem. Sorry, I don't buy that anymore. It is just thousands of men being hateful, that's all it is. 

Men who have issues with feminism isn't the same thing as these hate groups. 

Please don't drag this out into a debate, I know you like doing that...but I really am not debating the pros or cons of feminism. I am just solidifying what I already feared: that the kooks have taken over the internet.


----------



## Cletus

marduk said:


> Hmm. I would not agree with you in that assessment that it is not there.
> 
> But if you want to stop talking about it, that's ok.


When looking to create confirmation bias, one should not be surprised when it is found.


----------



## Marduk

This is also an interesting read:
Man-Hating Feminism More Than Just A Myth*|*Octavia Sheepshanks

At the very least, one must accept that feminism has an image problem.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Marduk, Where are the examples of raging, man hating feminism that MRA's are supposedly responding to? They aren't there, or they are so hard to find that they are only a fraction of the MRA scathing, woman hating propaganda.


Read many of Julie Bindel's articles. I read an interesting one where she was interviewed by a gay guy, and he gave up talking to her in disgust.

Follow any of the links at the bottom of the wiki page.

I'm not sure about 'raging' but the anti-male sentiment is quite alive and well with some. 


"Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." - Andrea Dworkin

"Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concnentrate on attacking this institution" - Sheila Cronin

"The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." - Sally Miller Gearhart

"I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have... He's just incapable of it." - Barbara Jordan

Now, I'm not sure if you'd call this stuff raging, but it is there.


> What I was told several times by men who justify the MRA constant hateful screeching woman hating diatribes was that it was "no worse than what the radfems say" and that it was in response to what the radfems say. My bad, I assumed that meant that there was a sizable amount of horrible, man hating radfem screech fests. But there isn't. There are 10,000 MRA screech films there at a quick google search, but maybe just 1 screeching radfem film or video.


Again, I cannot ascribe measurements to say which is worse, except to say that it's all polarizing and distastefull -- the anti-female rhetoric _and_ the anti-male rhetoric.


> Again, that was my own problem apparently....because I assumed there was more of it. But apparently the 1/10,000 ratio is enough radical feminism for these MRA hate groups to feel justified in making their hateful propaganda.


How do you ascribe 1/10000? Perhaps google searches tell you this.

But there are 'women's studies' courses and degrees in many campuses across this world. I have yet to see a 'men's studies' in kind.



> And none of this means I don't feel men have rights or that I am a radical raging feminist myself. I was just saddened and curious about the ENORMOUS amount of hateful videos and had been told it was "in response" to radfem. Sorry, I don't buy that anymore. It is just thousands of men being hateful, that's all it is.
> 
> Men who have issues with feminism isn't the same thing as these hate groups.
> 
> Please don't drag this out into a debate, I know you like doing that...but I really am not debating the pros or cons of feminism. I am just solidifying what I already feared: that the kooks have taken over the internet.


This isn't about the debate for me, this isn't me poking fun. I agree that anti- any particular gender is bad.

But to say it isn't there is not the case.


----------



## EleGirl

tom67 said:


> In a nut shell
> UN Wants To Censor Internet To Save Feminists' Feelings


Below are the things that were discussed at the UN. Note that none of them are what that article you linked to was talking about. The author of that article apparently is ok with all 6 of the items that were listed in the ACTUAL report. 

Do you agree with the author of that article that all of the items listed below are just dandy and should be allowed with no consequences? How about if someone was doing those things to you, to your wife, or your children? Are you ok with that?

there are six broad categories that encompass forms of cyber VAWG.50

*1. Hacking:* the use of technology to gain illegal or unauthorized access to systems or resources for the purpose of acquiring personal information, altering or modifying information, or slandering and denigrating the victim and/or VAWG organizations. e.g., violation of passwords and controlling computer functions, such as freezing the computer or logging off the user 

*2. Impersonation: *the use of technology to assume the identity of the victim or someone else in order to access private information, embarrass or shame the victim, contact the victim, or create fraudulent identity documents; e.g., sending offensive emails from victim’s email account; calling victim from unknown number to avoid call being blocked 

*3. Surveillance/Tracking: *the use of technology to stalk and monitor a victim’s activities and behaviours either in real-time or historically; eg. GPS tracking via mobile phone; tracking keystrokes to recreate victim/survivor’s activities on computer 

*4. Harassment/Spamming: *the use of technology to continuously contact, annoy, threaten, and/or scare the victim. This is ongoing behaviour and not one isolated incident; e.g., persistent mobile calls/ texts; filling up voicemail with messages so no one else can leave a message 

*5. Recruitment: *use of technology to lure potential victims into violent situations; e.g., fraudulent 
postings and advertisements (dating sites; employment opportunities); traffickers using chat rooms, message boards, and websites to communicate/advertise 

*6. Malicious Distribution:* use of technology to manipulate and distribute defamatory and illegal materials related to the victim and/or VAWG organizations; e.g., threatening to or leaking intimate photos/video; using technology as a propaganda tool to promote violence against women. 


http://www.unwomen.org/~/media/head...lence_gender report.pdf?v=1&d=20150924T154259


----------



## McDean

“Fear is the path to the dark side…fear leads to anger…anger leads to hate…hate leads to suffering.” - Yoda

I have no position on any of this other than to say as someone who seemingly lives with their head buried in the sand on this(these) issues, because I seriously never hear them or see them outside of TAM, it smacks of playground antics at first glance. Follow the globalization process most children fall into if not coached by an adult or parent:

- That boy pushed me, "all boys are big meanies"
- That girl ignored me when I said hello, "all girls are big meanies"

by default:

- I am women punched by a man, 'all men are violent at heart'
- I am a man raked over the financial coals by a women, 'all women are gold-diggers'

Hating an entire gender, race, lifestyle etc. is the first clue that someone has issues they are not dealing with......


----------



## Cletus

marduk said:


> But there are 'women's studies' courses and degrees in many campuses across this world. I have yet to see a 'men's studies' in kind.


Coming to a college near you! 

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/fashion/masculinities-studies-stonybrook-michael-kimmel.html


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> Below are the things that were discussed at the UN. Note that none of them are what that article you linked to was talking about. The author of that article apparently is ok with all 6 of the items that were listed in the ACTUAL report.
> 
> Do you agree with the author of that article that all of the items listed below are just dandy and should be allowed with no consequences? How about if someone was doing those things to you, to your wife, or your children? Are you ok with that?
> 
> there are six broad categories that encompass forms of cyber VAWG.50
> 
> *1. Hacking:* the use of technology to gain illegal or unauthorized access to systems or resources for the purpose of acquiring personal information, altering or modifying information, or slandering and denigrating the victim and/or VAWG organizations. e.g., violation of passwords and controlling computer functions, such as freezing the computer or logging off the user
> 
> *2. Impersonation: *the use of technology to assume the identity of the victim or someone else in order to access private information, embarrass or shame the victim, contact the victim, or create fraudulent identity documents; e.g., sending offensive emails from victim’s email account; calling victim from unknown number to avoid call being blocked
> 
> *3. Surveillance/Tracking: *the use of technology to stalk and monitor a victim’s activities and behaviours either in real-time or historically; eg. GPS tracking via mobile phone; tracking keystrokes to recreate victim/survivor’s activities on computer
> 
> *4. Harassment/Spamming: *the use of technology to continuously contact, annoy, threaten, and/or scare the victim. This is ongoing behaviour and not one isolated incident; e.g., persistent mobile calls/ texts; filling up voicemail with messages so no one else can leave a message
> 
> *5. Recruitment: *use of technology to lure potential victims into violent situations; e.g., fraudulent
> postings and advertisements (dating sites; employment opportunities); traffickers using chat rooms, message boards, and websites to communicate/advertise
> 
> *6. Malicious Distribution:* use of technology to manipulate and distribute defamatory and illegal materials related to the victim and/or VAWG organizations; e.g., threatening to or leaking intimate photos/video; using technology as a propaganda tool to promote violence against women.
> 
> 
> http://www.unwomen.org/~/media/head...lence_gender report.pdf?v=1&d=20150924T154259


I dunno.

There are some problems with this document.

It never really describes exactly what it means by hateful or derogatory speech, just that it's there, and is harmful to women, and we should stop it. Which is hard to argue with, but the devil is in the details, right? When does a debate become harmful?

And then it just goes off the deep end:


> There is a well-worn statistic that 30% of all Internet traffic constitutes porn: Research also reveals that 88.2% of top rated porn scenes contain aggressive acts and 94% of the time the act is directed towards a woman.22 Furthermore, studies show that after viewing pornography men are more likely to: report decreased empathy for rape victims; have increasingly aggressive behavioral tendencies; report believing that a woman who dresses provocatively deserves to be raped; report anger at women who flirt but then refuse to have sex..."


Which I just can't buy into without some real hard evidence (no pun intended, of course).


----------



## Nynaeve

I think there's a definition problem in this thread and on TAM in general. Seems people on TAM use the term "radical feminist" to mean extreme feminism or ma-hating feminism. But "radical feminism" is an 'official' subset of feminism whichbis distinguished from liberal feminism and progressive feminism. 

There are women who call themselves "radical feminists" (Dworkin, McKinnon) but would not openly claim to be man-haters. A lot of their quotes are taken out of context. These women are academics, not bloggers. They don't do sound bites or tweets. They write dissertations. Taking one sentence out of a 30 page paper is very easy to make it sound more extreme than it would in context.

Anyway...radical feminism has an official definition. It is not synonymous with extreme, militant, out in crazy town feminism. The latter exists. Of course it does. Some humans will take anything to extreme and insane places.

But...I think MRAs interpret moderate feminism as extreme because they have personal issues. IME there are more men who are vocal and united in their extreme anti-woman and anti-feminist beliefs and rhetoric than there are women who are vocal and united in anti-men beliefs and rhetoic. I don't know why. My best guess is they were raised by or influenced by sexist men to believe they were entitled to dominate and possess women and now that our society has changed to make that no longer acceptable, they're pissed and bitter and blame women/feminism for every bad thing real or perceived.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Nynaeve said:


> I think there's a definition problem in this thread and on TAM in general. Seems people on TAM use the term "radical feminist" to mean extreme feminism or ma-hating feminism. But "radical feminism" is an 'official' subset of feminism whichbis distinguished from liberal feminism and progressive feminism.
> 
> There are women who call themselves "radical feminists" (Dworkin, McKinnon) but would not openly claim to be man-haters. A lot of their quotes are taken out of context. These women are academics, not bloggers. They don't do sound bites or tweets. They write dissertations. Taking one sentence out of a 30 page paper is very easy to make it sound more extreme than it would in context.
> 
> Anyway...radical feminism has an official definition. It is not synonymous with extreme, militant, out in crazy town feminism. The latter exists. Of course it does. Some humans will take anything to extreme and insane places.
> 
> But...I think MRAs interpret moderate feminism as extreme because they have personal issues. IME there are more men who are vocal and united in their extreme anti-woman and anti-feminist beliefs and rhetoric than there are women who are vocal and united in anti-men beliefs and rhetoic. I don't know why. My best guess is they were raised by or influenced by sexist men to believe they were entitled to dominate and possess women and now that our society has changed to make that no longer acceptable, they're pissed and bitter and blame women/feminism for every bad thing real or perceived.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I agree with you in general, but it's hard to ascribe Julie Bindel as having anything other than anti-male sentiment. I've read several articles and posts by her, and it's difficult to come to any other conclusion.

But otherwise, I agree -- which is why at the very least one must accept that 'radical feminism' has an image problem, perhaps first starting with what we mean by 'radical feminism.'

This is my working definition, from Wikipedia:


> Radical feminism is a perspective within feminism that calls for a radical reordering of society in which male supremacy is eliminated in all social and economic contexts.[1] Radical feminists seek to abolish patriarchy by challenging existing social norms and institutions, rather than through a purely political process. This includes challenging traditional gender roles, opposing the sexual objectification of women, and raising public awareness about rape and violence against women.
> 
> Early radical feminism, arising within second-wave feminism in the 1960s,[2] typically viewed patriarchy as a "transhistorical phenomenon"[3] prior to or deeper than other sources of oppression, "not only the oldest and most universal form of domination but the primary form"[4] and the model for all others.[4] Later politics derived from radical feminism ranged from cultural feminism[1] to more syncretic politics that placed issues of class, economics, etc. on a par with patriarchy as sources of oppression.[5] Radical feminists locate the root cause of women's oppression in patriarchal gender relations, as opposed to legal systems (as in liberal feminism) or class conflict (as in anarchist feminism, socialist feminism, and Marxist feminism).


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism


----------



## Nynaeve

marduk said:


> I agree with you in general, but it's hard to ascribe Julie Bindel as having anything other than anti-male sentiment. I've read several articles and posts by her, and it's difficult to come to any other conclusion.
> 
> But otherwise, I agree -- which is why at the very least one must accept that 'radical feminism' has an image problem, perhaps first starting with what we mean by 'radical feminism.'
> 
> This is my working definition, from Wikipedia:
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_feminism


I'm not familiar with Julie Bindel. I haven't made much of a study of radical feminists since law school (10 years ago). I really like a lot that McKinnon had to say about rape and the culture of victim blaming. I think her work in the legal arena was necessary and important. But I do think a lot of radical feminists are a little extreme in some things. On an academic level I get what they're saying but they do tend to see all individual men as part of the patriarchy problem. I see most individual men as either allies or victims of the system too. I'm just as concerned that my sons will grow up in a culture insisting they have to conform to macho stereotypes to constantly prove their masculinity as I am concerned that my daughter will be paid less for the same work.

I think most feminists these days are the Emma Watson HeforShe variety. 

I also know for a fact that the loudest voices in online feminism (outside of academia) are liberal and progressive feminists who mostly seem to hate radical feminists becasue the latter are known for being trans exclusionary.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk

Nynaeve said:


> I'm not familiar with Julie Bindel. I haven't made much of a study of radical feminists since law school (10 years ago). I really like a lot that McKinnon had to say about rape and the culture of victim blaming. I think her work in the legal arena was necessary and important. But I do think a lot of radical feminists are a little extreme in some things. On an academic level I get what they're saying but they do tend to see all individual men as part of the patriarchy problem. I see most individual men as either allies or victims of the system too. I'm just as concerned that my sons will grow up in a culture insisting they have to conform to macho stereotypes to constantly prove their masculinity as I am concerned that my daughter will be paid less for the same work.
> 
> I think most feminists these days are the Emma Watson HeforShe variety.
> 
> I also know for a fact that the loudest voices in online feminism (outside of academia) are liberal and progressive feminists who mostly seem to hate radical feminists becasue the latter are known for being trans exclusionary.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I agree.

And that's the heart of it, isn't it: for feminism to be taken seriously and to provide a credible counterpoint for the thinking man... it needs to speak out against those that put 'feminism' and 'anti-male' or 'anti-trans' or the like together.

It's a process of maturing, I think. It will happen, and is already happening. And that's where I was hoping this conversation would go, so thank you for that. Denying there is a problem is no real way to deal with it, even if it's 99% perceptual.

And human beings are human -- there will always be those that seek to extend a movement beyond it's intention simply to gain power, influence, or even notariety. Because there will be those that celebrate that, until they see the ugliness of it, and don't.


----------



## always_alone

marduk said:


> Read many of Julie Bindel's articles. I read an interesting one where she was interviewed by a gay guy, and he gave up talking to her in disgust.
> 
> Follow any of the links at the bottom of the wiki page.
> 
> I'm not sure about 'raging' but the anti-male sentiment is quite alive and well with some.
> 
> 
> "Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman." - Andrea Dworkin
> 
> "Since marriage constitutes slavery for women, it is clear that the women's movement must concnentrate on attacking this institution" - Sheila Cronin
> 
> "The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race." - Sally Miller Gearhart
> 
> "I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have... He's just incapable of it." - Barbara Jordan



Yeah, it's super easy to pull quotes illustrating all the terrible things feminists have said because the MGTOW and MRA folks have so kindly amassed them and repeated them ad nauseum for their "see, aren't feminists terribel" diatribes.

Too bad they take most of them completely out of context and completely disregard what is actually being said.

Have there been man-hating feminists? Probably, although note that most of the culled quotes from radical feminists are from the late 70s and early 80s. 

And what most MRA types miss: a challenge to the patriarchal social structures is not actually the same thing as blaming or hating men.


----------



## always_alone

Cletus said:


> Coming to a college near you!
> 
> http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/09/fashion/masculinities-studies-stonybrook-michael-kimmel.html


Coming? There are lots of men's studies programs all over the place. Most women's studies programs are no longer known as such, and are becoming gender studies.

Equal opportunity.


----------



## Marduk

always_alone said:


> Yeah, it's super easy to pull quotes illustrating all the terrible things feminists have said because the MGTOW and MRA folks have so kindly amassed them and repeated them ad nauseum for their "see, aren't feminists terribel" diatribes.
> 
> Too bad they take most of them completely out of context and completely disregard what is actually being said.
> 
> Have there been man-hating feminists? Probably, although note that most of the culled quotes from radical feminists are from the late 70s and early 80s.
> 
> And what most MRA types miss: a challenge to the patriarchal social structures is not actually the same thing as blaming or hating men.


Actually, I've been reading her own articles, and some longer form papers she's done.

The more I read, actually, the scarier it gets.

Again, I ascribe her to be a lone nut who chooses to surround herself with people that support her viewpoint; she seems genuinely surprised by people that question it. I do not believe she speaks for feminism on the whole.

Again however, if feminism wants to get out of it's rut, it needs to deal with such viewpoints head on. Even if to manage it's perception.


----------



## MountainRunner

marduk said:


> Again however, if feminism wants to get out of it's rut, it needs to deal with such viewpoints head on. Even if to manage it's perception.


That's true for any ideology. Radical Islam vs. moderate Muslims, overzealous, fanatical Christians vs. moderate Christians. And yes...The "Red Pill" crybabies vs. "us guys who really love women and want to be in loving, healthy relationships with them".


----------



## MountainRunner

For the record...I asked my wife the other day "Do you identify as a feminist?" to which she abruptly replied with a resounding "Yes"....

Damn I love that woman.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Paul Elam of A Voice for Men: In His Own Words | we hunted the mammoth

Factchecking a list of "Hateful Quotes From Feminists" | we hunted the mammoth

These are two pieces by Dave Futrelle who blogs about MRA's and their shenanigans. He gets people sending him the hateful crap that is all around the MRA sites, and then he investigates it and offers lots of backup for his sources. In the first link above, he assembled a list of the scary sh*t one of the biggest MRA dudes has said, Paul Elam. In the second post, he does a fact check on many of the often regurgitated quotes from feminists, some of which were included on links posted on this thread.

Again...my point in opening this thread was to find any sources of man-hating prominent radical feminists saying or writing things just as vile as the MRA crew. But I can't find it. Anywhere. I actually thought I *would* find it. I had just assumed it would be there, but it isn't.

Here's a Cracked article (I love them so much), an op-ed piece on MRA's. I'm posting this just to show that hey, it isn't just me and a few other women here who find this hateful crap utterly ridiculous in the way it is executed online. The guys who write and blog and make videos are just killing their own message and image with the crap. It is obvious and totally bizarre in its vitriol, not just to feminists and their supporters, but to many rational people who don't even have a dog in the fight.

Men's Rights | Cracked.com

Marduk, I get that you think feminism needs to "clean up its image". But I don't see it as even in the same ballpark of the hateful, insane image we have of the typical MRA, not even a radical one, a TYPICAL one.

Thankfully, when you search a little deeper, you find that MRAs are not actually all that common. They are just loud and scary and on the internet all day. It is a flash in the pan and will burn itself out soon. The biggest groups of them keep doing stupid things that paint them in a terrible light, thereby harming their own "cause".

However, I do think that as far as custody, paternity and legal issues are concerned, there will be some positive forward movement in the near-ish future that helps men and women both. As more and more people are divorced (which creates a situation where more people have empathy for each other because they've been through it, and therefore more compassion for those who divorce creating more amicable divorces), as they develop reliable non-sterilizing birth control for men, as more fathers are single dads, it will become more common for these issues to be handled more with more fairness and humanity.


----------



## Marduk

MountainRunner said:


> That's true for any ideology. Radical Islam vs. moderate Muslims, overzealous, fanatical Christians vs. moderate Christians. And yes...The "Red Pill" crybabies vs. "us guys who really love women and want to be in loving, healthy relationships with them".


I was going to say that exact thing, but didn't want to start a religious debate!

Anyway, I agree.


----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> Paul Elam of A Voice for Men: In His Own Words | we hunted the mammoth
> 
> Factchecking a list of "Hateful Quotes From Feminists" | we hunted the mammoth
> 
> These are two pieces by Dave Futrelle who blogs about MRA's and their shenanigans. He gets people sending him the hateful crap that is all around the MRA sites, and then he investigates it and offers lots of backup for his sources. In the first link above, he assembled a list of the scary sh*t one of the biggest MRA dudes has said, Paul Elam. In the second post, he does a fact check on many of the often regurgitated quotes from feminists, some of which were included on links posted on this thread.
> 
> Again...my point in opening this thread was to find any sources of man-hating prominent radical feminists saying or writing things just as vile as the MRA crew. But I can't find it. Anywhere. I actually thought I *would* find it. I had just assumed it would be there, but it isn't.
> 
> Here's a Cracked article (I love them so much), an op-ed piece on MRA's. I'm posting this just to show that hey, it isn't just me and a few other women here who find this hateful crap utterly ridiculous in the way it is executed online. The guys who write and blog and make videos are just killing their own message and image with the crap. It is obvious and totally bizarre in its vitriol, not just to feminists and their supporters, but to many rational people who don't even have a dog in the fight.
> 
> Men's Rights | Cracked.com
> 
> Marduk, I get that you think feminism needs to "clean up its image". But I don't see it as even in the same ballpark of the hateful, insane image we have of the typical MRA, not even a radical one, a TYPICAL one.
> 
> Thankfully, when you search a little deeper, you find that MRAs are not actually all that common. They are just loud and scary and on the internet all day. It is a flash in the pan and will burn itself out soon. The biggest groups of them keep doing stupid things that paint them in a terrible light, thereby harming their own "cause".
> 
> However, I do think that as far as custody, paternity and legal issues are concerned, there will be some positive forward movement in the near-ish future that helps men and women both. As more and more people are divorced (which creates a situation where more people have empathy for each other because they've been through it, and therefore more compassion for those who divorce creating more amicable divorces), as they develop reliable non-sterilizing birth control for men, as more fathers are single dads, it will become more common for these issues to be handled more with more fairness and humanity.


So saying most men should die or be rounded up into camps and 'checked out' like library books when women want them aren't even in the same ballpark as some of the nasty red pill stuff?

I hate that stuff as much as you do FW, but c'mon. Don't go apologist on me now.


----------



## Faithful Wife

You mean the ONE article posted in men's, under which you captioned a picture of the speaker with a "LOL!" as your response?

Dude, I could post 100 links by prominent MRA that literally suggest the rape and torture of women, another 100 talking about "how dare wh*res go about riding c*ck carousels", and another 100 about how ugly feminists are, another 100 about how they can't wait for sex robots to be created so they can eliminate women (almost) completely. That would be just a start. Another 100 by raving, ranting men who say things like "she's just upset that no one would rape her because she's a fat, ugly feminist".

And you want me to see this in the same realm as the ONE link you are talking about? Did you read any of the links I posted? Just curious. The evidence here is overwhelming.

If you had 100 links like one in the men's clubhouse, I would see it in the same realm as the MRA crap. But there aren't 100 links like that. Meanwhile there are 1,000's by screeching MRA's.

You can pretend to ignore the gigantic lop-sidedness of the nasty parts of MRA against feminism if you want.


----------



## MountainRunner

Faithful Wife said:


> You mean the ONE article posted in men's, under which you captioned a picture of the speaker with a "LOL!" as your response?
> 
> Dude, I could post 100 links by prominent MRA that literally suggest the rape and torture of women, another 100 talking about "how dare wh*res go about riding c*ck carousels", and another 100 about how ugly feminists are, another 100 about how they can't wait for sex robots to be created so they can eliminate women (almost) completely. That would be just a start. Another 100 by raving, ranting men who say things like "she's just upset that no one would rape her because she's a fat, ugly feminist".
> 
> And you want me to see this in the same realm as the ONE link you are talking about? Did you read any of the links I posted? Just curious. The evidence here is overwhelming.
> 
> If you had 100 links like one in the men's clubhouse, I would see it in the same realm as the MRA crap. But there aren't 100 links like that. Meanwhile there are 1,000's by screeching MRA's.
> 
> You can pretend to ignore the gigantic lop-sidedness of the nasty parts of MRA against feminism if you want.


Umm...FW, you do know that most of those guys that shout those things are nothing more than a bunch of "can't get laid because I have such a deplorable attitude PVSSIES, right?"


----------



## EleGirl

MountainRunner said:


> Umm...FW, you do know that most of those guys that shout those things are nothing more than a bunch of "can't get laid because I have such a deplorable attitude PVSSIES, right?"


Oh lordie, now you have gone and said it... :surprise: >


----------



## Mr The Other

Nynaeve said:


> I think there's a definition problem in this thread and on TAM in general. Seems people on TAM use the term "radical feminist" to mean extreme feminism or ma-hating feminism. But "radical feminism" is an 'official' subset of feminism whichbis distinguished from liberal feminism and progressive feminism.
> 
> There are women who call themselves "radical feminists" (Dworkin, McKinnon) but would not openly claim to be man-haters. A lot of their quotes are taken out of context. These women are academics, not bloggers. They don't do sound bites or tweets. They write dissertations. Taking one sentence out of a 30 page paper is very easy to make it sound more extreme than it would in context.
> 
> Anyway...radical feminism has an official definition. It is not synonymous with extreme, militant, out in crazy town feminism. The latter exists. Of course it does. Some humans will take anything to extreme and insane places.
> 
> But...I think MRAs interpret moderate feminism as extreme because they have personal issues. IME there are more men who are vocal and united in their extreme anti-woman and anti-feminist beliefs and rhetoric than there are women who are vocal and united in anti-men beliefs and rhetoic. I don't know why. My best guess is they were raised by or influenced by sexist men to believe they were entitled to dominate and possess women and now that our society has changed to make that no longer acceptable, they're pissed and bitter and blame women/feminism for every bad thing real or perceived.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I have two radical feminist friends. One believes that everything is the man's fault is the most stereotypical way. She firmly believes men are have little capability for empathy, when I put it to her that I might see that side more than her (being a man, I get most empathy from men), she refuted that argument by telling me that with her disability men were far more empathetic to her than women were. Therefore she was not biased. Therefore, men really were not capable of empathy. 
She firmly believes that most men are incapable of understanding they are rapists. When I would not have sex with her, she considered it a grave offense on my part and tried manipulation. She considers this site to be a MRA site. She also has lots of academic articles and papers to back up everything she says. Eventually, I had to cut off contact as she was too annoying, despite being otherwise nice, admirable and fun.

My other friend pointed out to me that St Vincent was a much better film than many, as it showed the bitter old man was in no need of redemption rather than having a child or woman redeem them with their pure heart, and accepted my rejection of Virgina Woolf (very strident on the rights of upper class women to look down on everyone else) as entirely reasonable.

In other words, I agree.

They are out there because blaming the other sex is easier than trying to understand them as people. I think of most MRAs as just not understanding how relationships work, like a man who just goes around giving shopkeepers money and then cannot understand why they are not allowed to take their sofa from their living room. Both angry groups are based on hate and are so eager to feel they rely on anger.


----------



## EleGirl

marduk said:


> Actually, I've been reading her own articles, and some longer form papers she's done.
> 
> The more I read, actually, the scarier it gets.
> 
> Again, I ascribe her to be a lone nut who chooses to surround herself with people that support her viewpoint; she seems genuinely surprised by people that question it. I do not believe she speaks for feminism on the whole.
> 
> Again however, *if feminism wants to get out of it's rut, it needs to deal with such viewpoints head on*. Even if to manage it's perception.


No one speaks for feminism as a whole.

That makes it sound like feminism is a person, or one institution, that needs to address and discredit a few nut cases. But we all know that there is not one organization or person what is 'feminism'.

Instead feminism is concept to which some people ascribe. It's a belief system that some live by.. mostly it's lived in our every day lives.

So who exactly do you think is supposed to spend all their time monitoring everything said, posted, filmed, published by every person who says that they are a feminist? Who is supposed to spend all of their working days denouncing those who you and others think should be denounced? And since, they will be doing this 24/7 who is going to pay them so that they and their families can live?

Oh, and while we are setting up the Censorship Feminist Organization of the World, let's also set up the Censorship MRA Organization of the World.

After all there is at least as much, if not a lot more, hate coming from what we call the MRA groups. Perhaps if MRA wants to get out of the rut, it needs to deal with such viewpoints head on. Even if to manage it's perception.


----------



## gouge_away

MountainRunner said:


> For the record...I asked my wife the other day "Do you identify as a feminist?" to which she abruptly replied with a resounding "Yes"....
> 
> Damn I love that woman.


The woman I am currently seeing calls herself a feminist as well.

The thing is, she helps enable my masculinity, by her femininity. It's *expletive* awesome.

She likes her man to be manly.
I like my woman to be smart, fun, and sexy. The relationship is working itself out.


----------



## gouge_away

I've been looking into the red pill and I think the subscribers/commenters live vicariously through the authors, and the authors are feeding the subs b.s. it's pretty fascinating.

These followers link to anything that objectifies women, any internet Howard Stern wanna be or the like, as if posting a link gets you closer to being a player...

As a man, which I am, these boys seem rather pathetic. Who else would worship an anonymous internet poster who brags of banging 100 chicks a year? Who the fvck brags anonymously online about banging 100 chicks a year?

Why the fvck are women even feeling the slightest bit threatened by trp?

Side note: I remember the first and last time I went to a strip club, I was 18, what I witnessed was a woman moving from guy to guy letting them motorboat her, and all I could think was, "I wonder if these chumps realize they are licking up the last guys snot as she moves around the room..." How attractive is that?


----------



## Faithful Wife

gouge_away said:


> Why the fvck are women even feeling the slightest bit threatened by trp?


Speaking for myself, I'm not threatened by it, I'm disgusted. I'm thoroughly confused at how men can support the nasty, hateful garbage. 

Though plenty of other women have faced actual threat and harassment by the good ole' boys club of rp/pua/mra's.


Roosh V forum members baffled that fat woman doesn?t welcome sexual harassment | we hunted the mammoth

Men?s rights activists, beware: Reddit introduces new anti-harassment policy - Salon.com

Rape and Death Threats: What Men's Rights Activists Really Look Like

MRA | End Online Misogyny

Men?s Rights Activists Rush to Defend Iowa Gun Nut Who Murdered Woman for Sexual Harassment Complaint | Alternet

https://reason.com/archives/2014/02/02/is-there-a-cyber-war-on-women/singlepage

John Oliver Nails Just How Terrifying The Internet Can Be For Women


----------



## Anubis

Faithful Wife said:


> Nah Marduk, I'm good. I found what I was looking for....or rather, the lack of it.
> 
> I'm not here to argue about the position of feminism. I was here to find those examples of raging, man-hating radical feminists that are supposedly in equal step with raging, woman hating MRA's. And it just isn't there. Period.
> 
> Mods you can close the thread if you want.


@FW - Nothing anyone says or does here is going to make you (sincerely) re-evaluate things.


----------



## bfree

So nobody thinks the video I posted shows "radical feminists" in action? Lol


----------



## always_alone

bfree said:


> So nobody thinks the video I posted shows "radical feminists" in action? Lol


What you posted was feminists protesting MRA talks. Which one might be inclined to see as censoring free speech, if it weren't for the fact that the organizations in question seem to think trashing feminism and women's rights is the correct way to "advance" men's rights.

I don't know too much about William Farrell, but if it is hate speech, it deserves protest, IMHO.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Warren Farrell?s notorious comments on date rape: Not any more defensible in context than out of it | we hunted the mammoth


----------



## Marduk

EleGirl said:


> No one speaks for feminism as a whole.
> 
> That makes it sound like feminism is a person, or one institution, that needs to address and discredit a few nut cases. But we all know that there is not one organization or person what is 'feminism'.
> 
> Instead feminism is concept to which some people ascribe. It's a belief system that some live by.. mostly it's lived in our every day lives.
> 
> So who exactly do you think is supposed to spend all their time monitoring everything said, posted, filmed, published by every person who says that they are a feminist? Who is supposed to spend all of their working days denouncing those who you and others think should be denounced? And since, they will be doing this 24/7 who is going to pay them so that they and their families can live?
> 
> Oh, and while we are setting up the Censorship Feminist Organization of the World, let's also set up the Censorship MRA Organization of the World.
> 
> After all there is at least as much, if not a lot more, hate coming from what we call the MRA groups. Perhaps if MRA wants to get out of the rut, it needs to deal with such viewpoints head on. Even if to manage it's perception.


I agree that there is hate coming from the MRA groups, and it also has a perception problem.

But leaders must lead, yes? If you are going to be a 'leader' of either group, and want credibility for yourself or the group as a whole, you must speak out, right?

Leaders must lead. When everyone is accountible, no one is accountible.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Anubis said:


> @FW - Nothing anyone says or does here is going to make you (sincerely) re-evaluate things.


If people had produced hundreds upon hundreds of links to hateful, screeching radical feminists talking about how much they hate men and want to see them tortured, raped, killed, removed from the planet, etc....then yes I would sincerely re-evaluate things. 

Nothing *I* say will make you and a few others here see what I was trying to do here. You will just continue to think you understand my position, which you clearly don't. You won't see the huge disparity in how MUCH of the nasty vile sh*t the MRA camp puts out compared to the almost non-existent amount of nasty vile sh*t radical feminists put out by comparison, and how this makes the MRA's look completely crazy. Nope, you'll just continue to see it as if I have a problem with MRA's because I myself am a radical feminist, which is what I've been told by guys here at TAM ever since I started questioning this insane hate group's tactics.

I'm not going to bother trying to change your minds. I've been there and done that and men just kept coming back over and over telling me that I don't care about men without actually listening to me. Which is fine, I guess I can't expect people to really understand what I'm saying and I'll just have to live with some of you thinking I'm a radical feminist who hates men or whatever you think. Feel free.

I suppose you did not read the op-ed piece in Cracked I linked, right? The one written by a man who thinks the MRA are a bunch of hateful scary internet trolls? I could produce many many others like it where other people's opinions, including a lot of men who are respected authors, reporters, etc, are the same as mine about the hateful crap. In other words, I'm not here alone in my opinion, for most people it is easy to see the bullying and sickening nonsense for what it is. But for some reason I'm framed here as if my position on it it is coming from a radical feminist position and not just a human decency position.

If the MRA camp had simply gone to work on actually helping men and mens rights, I would have joined them and so would most women. I'm sure this will get back an angry "no way!" from some guys here, but it is 100% true. Women love men, we love our fathers, brothers, husbands, sons and male friends. We do not want to see them suffer or be held back.

Meanwhile, there's an MRA somewhere reading this who is commenting that I am probably a fat ugly b*tch.


----------



## Fozzy




----------



## Marduk

Faithful Wife said:


> You mean the ONE article posted in men's, under which you captioned a picture of the speaker with a "LOL!" as your response?
> 
> Dude, I could post 100 links by prominent MRA that literally suggest the rape and torture of women, another 100 talking about "how dare wh*res go about riding c*ck carousels", and another 100 about how ugly feminists are, another 100 about how they can't wait for sex robots to be created so they can eliminate women (almost) completely. That would be just a start. Another 100 by raving, ranting men who say things like "she's just upset that no one would rape her because she's a fat, ugly feminist".
> 
> And you want me to see this in the same realm as the ONE link you are talking about? Did you read any of the links I posted? Just curious. The evidence here is overwhelming.
> 
> If you had 100 links like one in the men's clubhouse, I would see it in the same realm as the MRA crap. But there aren't 100 links like that. Meanwhile there are 1,000's by screeching MRA's.
> 
> You can pretend to ignore the gigantic lop-sidedness of the nasty parts of MRA against feminism if you want.


I am not arguing against MRA having profoundly mysogynistic viewpoints, particularly certain groups. I am not arguing that such things are good.

I am arguing that there are some femists that are mysandrists, anti-trans, male homophobes, and generally nasty people.

Saying that some feminists are bad does not say that all MRA people are good. 

I have no scale to say which is worse, so I am not saying which is worse. I'm saying some poeple are bad.

And when I said "lol!" it's because I thought she looked funny, and the first thing that struck me was that perhaps she wants all women to herself.


----------



## tom67

Again disagreeing with feminazis equals harassment welcome to 1984
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/09/uns-cyberharassment-report-is-really-bad.html#


----------



## Faithful Wife

marduk said:


> I agree that there is hate coming from the MRA groups, and it also has a perception problem.
> 
> But leaders must lead, yes? If you are going to be a 'leader' of either group, and want credibility for yourself or the group as a whole, you must speak out, right?
> 
> Leaders must lead. When everyone is accountible, no one is accountible.


Marduk, what you are saying is "it is feminism's fault that these men are being hateful azzholes".

Women again getting blamed for men's bad behavior.

Ele, will you please close the thread? It is just going to spin out of control from here, obviously. 

But I do thank everyone who actually tried to find me the links I was asking for.


----------



## tom67

MountainRunner said:


> Umm...FW, you do know that most of those guys that shout those things are nothing more than a bunch of "can't get laid because I have such a deplorable attitude PVSSIES, right?"


Well white knight keep on saying it you just may convince yourself lol.:wink2:


----------



## tom67

Faithful Wife said:


> Marduk, what you are saying is "it is feminism's fault that these men are being hateful azzholes".
> 
> Women again getting blamed for men's bad behavior.
> 
> Ele, will you please close the thread? It is just going to spin out of control from here, obviously.
> 
> But I do thank everyone who actually tried to find me the links I was asking for.


Oh wait a feminist who doesn't want to have a legit debate I'm shocked:surprise:
Are you Zoe Quinn?
Guess that's why they want to control the internet.


----------



## Faithful Wife

tom67 said:


> Oh wait a feminist who doesn't want to have a legit debate I'm shocked:surprise:
> Are you Zoe Quinn?
> Guess that's why they want to control the internet.


sigh...


----------

