Support the Ban Bossy campaign

[BruceVC]

Don't think he's actually commenting on gender equality, just seems to be making a jab at one (part of one) side in the fight.  Amusing that that got anyone pissed off, but oh well.

Gender equality is feminism and his entire post was based on this. I fail to see how you cannot think his post wasn't around a view of modern gender equality? Oh wait its suppose to be a joke....thats right I forgot. Let me know when it gets to the funny part

Edited March 13, 2014 by BruceVC

[Malcador]

Gender equality is feminism and his entire post was based on this. I fail to see how you cannot think his post wasn't around a view of modern gender equality? Oh wait its suppose to be a joke....thats right I forgot. Let me know when it gets to the funny part

Well, Gender equality and feminism being the same thing isn't always the case, depending on who you talk to. Price of ideology. But to me it's just a slight to feminists rather than on the concept of equality.

[Amentep]

Distilling away the "does this divide actually happen" I do ask, assuming this distinction is true, do people here feel it's a problem? If not, why not? Is asking this question truly "treating a symptom" or does (should?) it cause people to wonder WHY a campaign like this even starts up?

 

I'm definitely in the latter.

 

Do I think that girls are treated differently than boys at the macro-societal level? Yes.  We have studies that indicate subtle factors in education (some even mentioned in the BanBossy material) can lead girls away from achievement in areas of math and science.¹

 

Do I think there is value in discouraging bossy behavior in children? Yes.  There's a real tendency in modern thought to feel that negative reinforcement is valueless and I'm not convinced it is.  Bossy behavior should be discouraged - boy or girl.  Note I disagree with the precept of the BanBossy campaign that the same action in a boy called "leadership" is called "bossy" in a girl.  "Bossy" is a very specific set of negative behaviors and if people are using the word incorrectly it is not the fault of the word (again, treating the symptom - missuse of a word - rather than treating the reason why people might be misusing that word or even attempting to spread understanding about the word, its meaning and how that relates to negative behaviors we don't want to encourage and to positive behaviors we very much want to encourage).

 

Studies over the years have shown that as boys and girls develop, girls develop verbal ability much quicker than boys.  This will lead to a tendency for girls to interact with their social world through words more so than boys (which is why boys will demonstrate more physical aggression while girls will demonstrate more relational aggression, typically).  This is, probably, the reason why there is a perception of girls being labeled as "bossy" more than boys (as boys will be trying to assert their will over their peers through their physicality, not having the verbal acuity to attempt imposing their will through verbal methods).²  Ideally, though, I think we'd want to discourage both forms of aggression and channel those efforts towards something constructive.

 

Having said that, plenty of boys will be bossy during their development (just likely hitting it at a later stage of development) and if we feel that this attitude/action set is to be discouraged than we need to be able to "call it out", otherwise we'll either be transferring the bossy label to another word (as the negative traits would still need to be distinguished) or encouraging the behavior to continue (if we drop any concept of the "bossy" traits being negative for fear of discouraging "leadership"). 

 

Which gets back to the campaign; if the campaign is really about encouraging girls to be leaders and/or to not be discouraged from pursuing being positively assertive I'd argue they'd be better off campaigning positively than negatively (and while I'm sure they think they're being a positive campaign, I see any campaign that stacks itself against³ something to be inherently negative). 

 

If the goal of the campaign is to establish that women have fine leadership skills that can be nurtured and grown - which I think it is - I think they're going about it entirely the wrong way.  Because what people are going to take away from the campaign isn't going to be the positive message they're trying to deliver but the negative one they are delivering (even if it is unintentionally, as I think it is).

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¹There's also a devaluing of education as important - somehow - in high school that leads boys away from education which is why our college populations in many schools are overwhelmingly female - outside of the STEM majors.  Sometime in the 1980s women overtook men in higher education.  The question we in higher education face is "how do we encourage men to pursue college degrees" and "how do we encourage women to consider STEM majors as viable options for them".  Anecdotally, I can't tell you the number of times that I've talked to a young woman who has shifted away from a medical/pharmacological/dental major to "nursing" either because of factors OTHER than the challenge of the coursework.  And similarly men who place no value on education, soon to drop out because making money now if more important than making more money years from now.

 

²Note though that while I agree that boys and girls learn differently and learn at different rates, I do reject the notion that men or women taken as enormous groups (as opposed to individual vs individual) can't compete equally in education - unless there are some other cognitive factors at play (like dyscalculia).  Experience teaches us otherwise.  The problem in the educational system is that, honestly, it tends to be "one size fits all" which IMO is a terrible way to operate if your goal is to identify individual talent, skill and/or proclivity. 

 

³Unfortunately society has embraced the idea that if you're not against something you are for nothing.  So its not surprising that the "net meme" summation of the campaign is negative - #BanBossy

Edited March 13, 2014 by Amentep

[BruceVC]

 

Distilling away the "does this divide actually happen" I do ask, assuming this distinction is true, do people here feel it's a problem? If not, why not? Is asking this question truly "treating a symptom" or does (should?) it cause people to wonder WHY a campaign like this even starts up?

 

I'm definitely in the latter.

 

Do I think that girls are treated differently than boys at the macro-societal level? Yes.  We have studies that indicate subtle factors in education (some even mentioned in the BanBossy material) can lead girls away from achievement in areas of math and science.¹

 

Do I think there is value in discouraging bossy behavior in children? Yes.  There's a real tendency in modern thought to feel that negative reinforcement is valueless and I'm not convinced it is.  Bossy behavior should be discouraged - boy or girl.  Note I disagree with the precept of the BanBossy campaign that the same action in a boy called "leadership" is called "bossy" in a girl.  "Bossy" is a very specific set of negative behaviors and if people are using the word incorrectly it is not the fault of the word (again, treating the symptom - missuse of a word - rather than treating the reason why people might be misusing that word or even attempting to spread understanding about the word, its meaning and how that relates to negative behaviors we don't want to encourage and to positive behaviors we very much want to encourage).

 

Studies over the years have shown that as boys and girls develop, girls develop verbal ability much quicker than boys.  This will lead to a tendency for girls to interact with their social world through words more so than boys (which is why boys will demonstrate more physical aggression while girls will demonstrate more relational aggression, typically).  This is, probably, the reason why there is a perception of girls being labeled as "bossy" more than boys (as boys will be trying to assert their will over their peers through their physicality, not having the verbal acuity to attempt imposing their will through verbal methods).²  Ideally, though, I think we'd want to discourage both forms of aggression and channel those efforts towards something constructive.

 

Having said that, plenty of boys will be bossy during their development (just likely hitting it at a later stage of development) and if we feel that this attitude/action set is to be discouraged than we need to be able to "call it out", otherwise we'll either be transferring the bossy label to another word (as the negative traits would still need to be distinguished) or encouraging the behavior to continue (if we drop any concept of the "bossy" traits being negative for fear of discouraging "leadership"). 

 

Which gets back to the campaign; if the campaign is really about encouraging girls to be leaders and/or to not be discouraged from pursuing being positively assertive I'd argue they'd be better off campaigning positively than negatively (and while I'm sure they think they're being a positive campaign, I see any campaign that stacks itself against³ something to be inherently negative). 

 

If the goal of the campaign is to establish that women have fine leadership skills that can be nurtured and grown - which I think it is - I think they're going about it entirely the wrong way.  Because what people are going to take away from the campaign isn't going to be the positive message they're trying to deliver but the negative one they are delivering (even if it is unintentionally, as I think it is).

 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

¹There's also a devaluing of education as important - somehow - in high school that leads boys away from education which is why our college populations in many schools are overwhelmingly female - outside of the STEM majors.  Sometime in the 1980s women overtook men in higher education.  The question we in higher education face is "how do we encourage men to pursue college degrees" and "how do we encourage women to consider STEM majors as viable options for them".  Anecdotally, I can't tell you the number of times that I've talked to a young woman who has shifted away from a medical/pharmacological/dental major to "nursing" either because of factors OTHER than the challenge of the coursework.  And similarly men who place no value on education, soon to drop out because making money now if more important than making more money years from now.

 

²Note though that while I agree that boys and girls learn differently and learn at different rates, I do reject the notion that men or women taken as enormous groups (as opposed to individual vs individual) can't compete equally in education - unless there are some other cognitive factors at play (like dyscalculia).  Experience teaches us otherwise.  The problem in the educational system is that, honestly, it tends to be "one size fits all" which IMO is a terrible way to operate if your goal is to identify individual talent, skill and/or proclivity. 

 

³Unfortunately society has embraced the idea that if you're not against something you are for nothing.  So its not surprising that the "net meme" summation of the campaign is negative - #BanBossy

 

 

Thats an excellent, thoughtful and relevant post. Nice one. You have positioned the debate in a way that is easy to understand and even though you disagree with the campaign you have given, IMO,  a better solution. Let the campaign be a positive one as I agree that even though  BANBOSSY is intended to be positive the perception of it is negative and that means the message is wasted. I learnt a very insightful view today about an important topic, thanks

Edited March 13, 2014 by BruceVC

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

Don't think he's actually commenting on gender equality, just seems to be making a jab at one (part of one) side in the fight.  Amusing that that got anyone pissed off, but oh well.

 

Gender equality is feminism and his entire post was based on this. I fail to see how you cannot think his post wasn't around a view of modern gender equality? Oh wait its suppose to be a joke....thats right I forgot. Let me know when it gets to the funny part

No Bruce, feminism is supporting the advancement of one gender, gender equality is support of equality between both genders. If you honestly believe that you can achieve gender equality by focusing on the issues of one out of the two, you are a deluded nutjob.

 

Orogun's post was neither a troll attempt or taking a **** on gender equality.

[BruceVC]

 

 

Don't think he's actually commenting on gender equality, just seems to be making a jab at one (part of one) side in the fight.  Amusing that that got anyone pissed off, but oh well.

Gender equality is feminism and his entire post was based on this. I fail to see how you cannot think his post wasn't around a view of modern gender equality? Oh wait its suppose to be a joke....thats right I forgot. Let me know when it gets to the funny part

No Bruce, feminism is supporting the advancement of one gender, gender equality is support of equality between both genders. If you honestly believe that you can achieve gender equality by focusing on the issues of one out of the two, you are a deluded nutjob.

 

Orogun's post was neither a troll attempt or taking a **** on gender equality.

 

 

 

Feminism : http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/feminism?q=feminism

Gender Equality : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_equality

 

 

Unless you can  explain to me all the examples of how poor men are discriminated against in society and are not really seen as equal to women I reject your definition. We don't have campaigns about " equality for men"  because basically the issue doesn't exist for men. But please do tell me how hard your life has been being a man and what you demand changes so you are equal to women ...I really want to hear this one

[Volourn]

"Gender equality is feminism"

 

Feminism has very little to do with equality. Maybe at one point it did when it first came to be but not the modern version. Modern feminism is about evil men are, and how women are just victims. Modern feminism should be insulting to both women and men.

 

 

"Unless you can  explain to me all the examples of how poor men are discriminated against in society and are not really seen as equal to women I reject your definition. We don't have campaigns about " equality for men"  because basically the issue doesn't exist for men. But please do tell me how hard your life has been being a man and what you demand changes so you are equal to women ...I really want to hear this one"

 

Men are very much discriminated in modern society. In different ways than women but it is an issue. Been to divorce court? See how many men gets crewed over therer? Have you ever been a man accused of rape or abuse? Try to start a club for 'men only' and compare how that is dealt with clubs for 'women only"

 

I can throw out anedictal evidence of discrimination against men but the sexists would just poo poo it because men are evil and only exist to rape little girls. True story.

 

Men are to be feared and hated while women are to be pitied and babied according to modern society. Like I said, that's insulting to both women and men.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Volourn

[Malcador]

Theoretical definitions is one thing, actual practice tends to vary.

 

Reading a reddit 'feminist' posting about her hate of stay at home mom's and at the same time saying her ideal husband is a stay at home who'll do all the cleaning. Good comedy

[Meshugger]

Gender equality can produce results that are not politically correct sometimes:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70

 

Stupid nature, stop getting in the way of politics. Shoo, shoooo!

[Meshugger]

Besides, we do not have true gender equality until we also take account the following factors as well:

 

- The number of homeless are gender equal

- The number of prisoners are gender equal

- The number of murders committed are gender equal

- The number of people working, and dying in "dirty" jobs are gender equal

 

Somehow, i doubt that it will ever happen.

[BruceVC]

"Gender equality is feminism"

 

Feminism has very little to do with equality. Maybe at one point it did when it first came to be but not the modern version. Modern feminism is about evil men are, and how women are just victims. Modern feminism should be insulting to both women and men.

 

 

"Unless you can  explain to me all the examples of how poor men are discriminated against in society and are not really seen as equal to women I reject your definition. We don't have campaigns about " equality for men"  because basically the issue doesn't exist for men. But please do tell me how hard your life has been being a man and what you demand changes so you are equal to women ...I really want to hear this one"

 

Men are very much discriminated in modern society. In different ways than women but it is an issue. Been to divorce court? See how many men gets crewed over therer? Have you ever been a man accused of rape or abuse? Try to start a club for 'men only' and compare how that is dealt with clubs for 'women only"

 

I can throw out anedictal evidence of discrimination against men but the sexists would just poo poo it because men are evil and only exist to rape little girls. True story.

 

Men are to be feared and hated while women are to be pitied and babied according to modern society. Like I said, that's insulting to both women and men.

 

You know what Volo, I'm going to rephrase what I said due to your post. So thanks

 

Gender equality is NOT  feminism, I was mistaken. Feminism is a route to achieve true gender equality.

 

If you guys think that men are unequal compared to women please give me 3 examples that I'll investigate and we can campaign together on?

[BruceVC]

Besides, we do not have true gender equality until we also take account the following factors as well:

 

- The number of homeless are gender equal

- The number of prisoners are gender equal

- The number of murders committed are gender equal

- The number of people working, and dying in "dirty" jobs are gender equal

 

Somehow, i doubt that it will ever happen.

  I know you know thats not relevant .....but it was funny

[Valsuelm]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Barti, neutrality is fine and yes I agree that young boys can have confidence problems and also not apply for certain jobs because of it. But I doubt the main reason for this lack of confidence is due to them believing it's because of there gender and the result of this is they believe they won't get a certain job or be able to have a certain role in society

 

 

You haven't watched the videos I linked earlier have you?

 

 

No I haven't, I don't think videos carry that much credibility. I prefer links with references like that link you provided about effectiveness of sanctions against South Africa

 

 

Seriously? You don't think interviews with people, pictures, motion pictures, and actually discussion you can hear has credibility? While the videos I linked don't really have any first person interviews as they're discussing an ideology, videos are of the utmost importance if you're going to learn about many subjects as no article about an interview can ever beat the actual interview. In addition, a written article, no matter how well written or cited, is much more open to misinterpretation than a video with a face and a voice for reasons that have everything to do with how effective various forms of communication are. Video is second only to in person discussion in many instances.

 

You've closed yourself off to a great deal of information if you don't watch videos. And as for citation, some videos have it, some don't, but the onus of homework on a particular subject you're watching is then upon you (which is where it really is even with citations). Every video you ever watch should be researched, that's how you learn. If you don't watch, you don't learn, if you don't research you don't learn. You effectively close your mind to innumerable possibilities. Which really explains a bit in regards to how much you tow the official popular line on so many subjects.

 

Insofar as the subject at hand, I linked the videos as they (if you watched them) would introduce you to some concepts and ideology I'm pretty sure you are not familiar with, as much of what you've asserted to believe in on these forums is partially derived from the concepts I linked. There are definitely articles out there on the subject at hand (with citations too), but I'm not going to bother go dig for links for someone who actually thinks videos on whatever it is we're talking about aren't relevant or something that can be enlightening. Not to mention the articles I've read on the issues don't tackle what the videos convey as good as the videos do (if you watch them, and do your homework on what they bring up).

 

The only scenario I can think of that doesn't involve ignorance on your part in regards to refusing to watch videos anyone links here is if you're deaf. As for a deaf person I could certainly see where watching videos on youtube would be problematic as the closed captioning of most videos is inaccurate. Are you deaf or do you just choose to be ignorant?

Edited March 13, 2014 by Valsuelm

[Valsuelm]

 

Feminism has very little to do with equality. Maybe at one point it did when it first came to be but not the modern version. Modern feminism is about evil men are, and how women are just victims. Modern feminism should be insulting to both women and men.

 

 

It is insulting to both men and women, anyone who thinks for themselves really. I know more than a few women who are insulted and disgusted by modern feminism.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Valsuelm

[BruceVC]

 

 

Feminism has very little to do with equality. Maybe at one point it did when it first came to be but not the modern version. Modern feminism is about evil men are, and how women are just victims. Modern feminism should be insulting to both women and men.

 

 

It is insulting to both men and women, anyone who thinks for themselves really. I know more than a few women who are insulted and disgusted by modern feminism.

 

 

What parts are they disgusted with exactly ?

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Unless you can explain to me all the examples of how poor men are discriminated against in society and are not really seen as equal to women I reject your definition.

 

Men are sentenced to longer prison terms than women for the same crimes (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/11/men-women-prison-sentence-length-gender-gap_n_1874742.html)

 

Men are less likely to keep custody of children in a divorce (http://www.attorneys.com/child-custody/why-do-women-win-most-custody-battles/)

 

Men are more likely to have their genitals mutilated as a child. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision)

 

We don't have campaigns about " equality for men" because basically the issue doesn't exist for men.

No, because the idea that you can achieve gender equality by focusing solely on one gender(as modern feminism does) is remarkably stupid.

 

But please do tell me how hard your life has been being a man and what you demand changes so you are equal to women ...I really want to hear this one

I would like to not receive harsher sentences than a woman would because I have a schlong.

 

If I get divorced, I would like to not be denied custody because I have a schlong.

 

I would've liked to have a say before the doctors took a knife to my schlong is and lopped off my foreskin as a newborn.

Edited March 13, 2014 by KaineParker

[aluminiumtrioxid]

I love how people who presumably never took a gender studies course, or spoke to actual feminists (reading reddit threads does not count) are so quick to denounce an entire intellectual movement they know nothing about. Kinda like the people who don't believe in evolution because they lack the scientific background to even understand what it is about. (Low blow? Yes. Also true.)

[213374U]

²Note though that while I agree that boys and girls learn differently and learn at different rates, I do reject the notion that men or women taken as enormous groups (as opposed to individual vs individual) can't compete equally in education - unless there are some other cognitive factors at play (like dyscalculia).  Experience teaches us otherwise.  The problem in the educational system is that, honestly, it tends to be "one size fits all" which IMO is a terrible way to operate if your goal is to identify individual talent, skill and/or proclivity. 

 

"Can" and "are inclined to" are different things, and while you already addressed this in your post, I think the problem is that the data used to "identify" gender equality problems glosses over this fact. Underlying the issue of gender equality is also the question of whether men and women are actually equal, value judgments notwithstanding. Your pointing out of differences in verbal skill development rates is a good hint that this is a problem that is, at best, oversimplified. I'm sure someone more intelligent and insightful than me could find more faults with this sort of social engineering initiatives, but that's enough to give me pause.

 

Also, I'm going to object to the assumption that the goal of education is in any way identifying talent. Your wording makes it ambiguous whether it's what you believe is the building principle of education or rather what you believe it should be, but modern education is there to provide a standarized process through which people can obtain a qualification that will be required for a job, and little else. Talent is irrelevant.

[Orogun01]

@Bruce,Kaine,Malcador: Sorry if my post gave you guys grievances, it certainly wasn't my intent. It was more of a facetious attempt at illustrating and revealing the underlying tone of Third Wave feminism, which it seems to be only embraced openly by fringe elements. I don't think I can adopt a political view just because I agree with some of their points, and specially not if the rest of it is deranged ( I couldn't think of a softer word ). Whatever the intent the focus of feminism on what they perceive to be female issues caused by society and trying to change that society, rather than having women change their perspectives and empowering will probably have negative connotations. If you remove all societal restrictions and gender roles from women they are likely to grow in a vacuum where they have no norm to base themselves against. So far feminism hasn't come up with a positive role model as to what women should become, and more focus on the negative isn't going to help.

@Ametep: Good read, I'm liking you more with each post

[Malcador]

I love how people who presumably never took a gender studies course, or spoke to actual feminists (reading reddit threads does not count) are so quick to denounce an entire intellectual movement they know nothing about. Kinda like the people who don't believe in evolution because they lack the scientific background to even understand what it is about. (Low blow? Yes. Also true.)

 

Good thing about sciences, no need for silly humanities courses like gender studies .  And why does speaking to them in person matter whereas reading commentary by them online does not ? Also,  I wasn't denouncing the entire 'intellectual movement' based on that, as you can read above I've mainly highlighted that as a section of that 'movement'.

 

Well, I guess we've got insults out of the way, I guess we await receipt of a sermon.

 

No worries Orugon, some apparently thought that little jab was OUTRAGEOUS, and so on.

Edited March 13, 2014 by Malcador

[Valsuelm]

I love how people who presumably never took a gender studies course, or spoke to actual feminists (reading reddit threads does not count) are so quick to denounce an entire intellectual movement they know nothing about. Kinda like the people who don't believe in evolution because they lack the scientific background to even understand what it is about. (Low blow? Yes. Also true.)

 

You're an extra special level of brainwashed if you think taking a gender studies course is required to understand modern feminism, or a course in most anything to understand whatever it is the course is attempting to convey.

 

And one would have to live under a rock to have reached adulthood and not have spoken to a modern feminist. They are not rare creatures.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Good thing about sciences, no need for silly humanities courses like gender studies. 

 

Since when was being a scientist ever about taking pride in ignorance? I mean... really? Is this your argument? "I have a degree in an unspecified science, therefore I am permitted to be as ignorant about every other facets of the body of the collective human knowledge as it is possible, and also be proud of it"?

 

And why does speaking to them in person matter whereas reading commentary by them online does not ? 

 

On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog, etc. Also, you have no way to verify whether the person in question has any actual credentials, which is kinda important, I think.

 

 

Also, wasn't denouncing the 'intellectual movement' based on that, as you can read above I've mainly highlighted that as a section of that 'movement'.

 

 

And I never mentioned "Malcador is an evil, evil person and my words were exclusively about him, and him alone"  

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

@Bruce,Kaine,Malcador: Sorry if my post gave you guys grievances, it certainly wasn't my intent. It was more of a facetious attempt at illustrating and revealing the underlying tone of Third Wave feminism, which it seems to be only embraced openly by fringe elements. I don't think I can adopt a political view just because I agree with some of their points, and specially not if the rest of it is deranged ( I couldn't think of a softer word ). Whatever the intent the focus of feminism on what they perceive to be female issues caused by society and trying to change that society, rather than having women change their perspectives and empowering will probably have negative connotations. If you remove all societal restrictions and gender roles from women they are likely to grow in a vacuum where they have no norm to base themselves against. So far feminism hasn't come up with a positive role model as to what women should become, and more focus on the negative isn't going to help.

@Ametep: Good read, I'm liking you more with each post

No grievance on my end. Just understood what you meant.

 

And why does speaking to them in person matter whereas reading commentary by them online does not ?

They can back-pedal in person.

[Volourn]

"If you guys think that men are unequal compared to women please give me 3 examples that I'll investigate and we can campaign together on?"

 

My last post gave examples. Others gave you examples. You'd need to have your head buried in the sand if you aren't at least a little aware of them. It's common knowledge that men are more likely to be screwed in the divorce than women simply because theya re the men and the stereotype that men are bad parents and women are good parents. hence the term 'deadbeat dad' is commonly used even though there are plenty of women who abandon their children.  But, they are never called out as 'deadbeat moms' and if they were a 'feminist' would call the term sexist yet they'll glad  use 'deadbeat dad' repeatedly.

 

A man accused of rape - even falsely (happens a lot more than you think) can have his entire life ruined even if the truth comes out.

 

A man starts or has a 'man only club' he is being sexist and mean.

 

A woman starts or has a 'woman only club' she is protecting women from the big bad rapist men.

 

DISGUSTING.

 

Modern feminists don't know what true equality is. In fact, the term 'feminist' is sexist espciaily if you use it in place of 'equality' because it implicitly implies than the desire for equality is a feminine trait which is absolutely asanine.

[Malcador]

 

Good thing about sciences, no need for silly humanities courses like gender studies.

 

Since when was being a scientist ever about taking pride in ignorance? I mean... really? Is this your argument? "I have a degree in an unspecified science, therefore I am permitted to be as ignorant about every other facets of the body of the collective human knowledge as it is possible, and also be proud of it"?

 

 

And why does speaking to them in person matter whereas reading commentary by them online does not ?

 

 

On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog, etc. Also, you have no way to verify whether the person in question has any actual credentials, which is kinda important, I think.

 

 

 

Also, wasn't denouncing the 'intellectual movement' based on that, as you can read above I've mainly highlighted that as a section of that 'movement'.

 

And I never mentioned "Malcador is an evil, evil person and my words were exclusively about him, and him alone"

 

I guess, the joke about gender studies is lost on you - granted it was an in joke at my school, humanities being useless (For we are Engineers, above pathetic humans!). That and gender studies is pretty low down on the list of interesting humanities for me - the myriad of history courses for once is superior in that regard. That and it having a certain...aura of being an echo chamber, at least in my school.

 

True that the person can pretend to be a feminist, but I can't see why - is there some sort of far reaching conspiracy of pretend feminists that post bizarre stuff to discredit the movement ? People come up with nutty stuff on their own as reality shows every day, right ? Based on perusing the sites, I've no real reason to suspect the populace of the feminist sites I browse now and then are all fake ones, heh. Though I find they label people too readily and dismiss any counterargument as 'mansplaining' or some other passive aggressive term to just shut it down.

 

As for your last comment, pardon ? Some feminists actually do spout the crap that Orugon posted. Usually they end up as the typical neophyte zealot (so some 16 year old girl, all in for The Cause), but not always. Saying that isn't slugging off the entirety.