This is fairly easy to understand. Some people just can't wrap their heads around the idea that you can be for gender equal rights, but have serious reservations about, or even be against, feminism.
During the Middle Ages in Western Europe, the Catholic Church asserted an absolute monopoly over how Christians established a relationship with God. Among the secular population, it was taken for granted that the only way to be a good, pious Christian was to be a good Catholic, and follow unquestioningly the dictates of the clergy. To even hint that a person could be a good Christian without following the Church was at some times a crime punishable by death.
Finally, somebody got fed up. A theologian named Martin Luther, basing his reasoning on good scholarship and careful reasoning, rejected the notion that a person could establish their relationship with God only through the Catholic Church. He advanced the novel idea that people could establish a closer relationship with God and the teachings of Jesus through direct examination of both the New Testament and their own conscience.
This is pretty much taken for granted nowadays. Bu it was appallingly heretical by the Catholic hierarchy when it first emerged. They had no way of fitting it into their worldview. It challenged the Church's monopoly over Christian thought. The idea that a person could find their own relationship with the Almighty without the intervention of clergy was anathema. So they branded Protestants as heretics, Satan-worshippers, etc. - as it was the only way they could fit Protestantism within their limited worldview. They were psychologically incapable of of seeing the good points of this argument or understanding that a person could be both a good Christian and a non-Catholic.
The same thing is happening with the challenge to feminism that the men's rights movement presents. The MRM breaks the monopoly in the debate over how gender is 'constructed' and/or how equality is achieved. The MRM posits that men have their own concerns, their own worldviews, their goals and ways of breaking out of gender stereotypes and roles assigned to men, their own take on equality and human rights. That one can be both in favor of human rights for women as well as for men.
This seems to be extremely threatening on an intellectual level to some (not all) people who profess to be feminists. They assume that gender roles, constructs and relationships can only be examined within a framework of feminist thought. Some of them simply don't know how to fit the MRM into their worldview, not realizing – or perhaps, simply not accepting - that it's their worldview that is in need of adjustment. Their discomfort and confusion drives them to search relentlessly for the smallest nugget of evidence to brand MRAs as misogynist, homophobic and racist. In the same way the Protestant challenge drove the Catholic hierarchy to brand all Protestants as in league with the devil.
It's easier that way. There is nothing you have to change in your worldview. Nothing you have to re-think. Nothing that has to change.
The confusion and discomfort is also evident when they make claims like, 'If you want to achieve better rights and conditions for males, you must do it through feminism and by working with feminists.' It's like the Catholic Church saying to Luther, 'If you want to have a closer relationship with God, you must only do it through the Church.'
This person thinks you're a man because they are simply psychologically incapable of understanding the concept that a female can think men's concerns are important, too. So, in their mind, you must be a male.
Here's the Urban Dictionary definition ofRule 16 :
Generally accepted internet rule that states that there are no girls on the internet. Usually used with rule 34.
An actual real internets girl will typically NOT engage in explicit description of her sexual organs or their current, past, or projected future engagements. For example, a real Internet girl might mention she is on her period. This is fine, well within realgurl guidelines and a clear warning to leave the immediate vicinity. However, she is unlikely to describe the vile seepages involved. Eg: "The crimson ichor of my wymenhood cycle is leaking from my puffy, raw vagina (That aches to be fucked)."
'There are no girls on the internet' first gained popularity among what indisputably is the majority internet user demographic, the chronic unlayable.
[–]Lethn 104 points105 points106 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 48 points49 points50 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Lethn 19 points20 points21 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]wanked_in_space 2 points3 points4 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]superhobo666 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]UDT22 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]mwobuddy 7 points8 points9 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]An_Orange_Steel -4 points-3 points-2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]omegaphallic 45 points46 points47 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[–]iongantas 29 points30 points31 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]notacrackheadofficer 3 points4 points5 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 13 points14 points15 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]DevilishRogue 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]omegaphallic 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]espositojoe 20 points21 points22 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]An_Orange_Steel 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]CMOS222 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
This is fairly easy to understand. Some people just can't wrap their heads around the idea that you can be for gender equal rights, but have serious reservations about, or even be against, feminism.
During the Middle Ages in Western Europe, the Catholic Church asserted an absolute monopoly over how Christians established a relationship with God. Among the secular population, it was taken for granted that the only way to be a good, pious Christian was to be a good Catholic, and follow unquestioningly the dictates of the clergy. To even hint that a person could be a good Christian without following the Church was at some times a crime punishable by death.
Finally, somebody got fed up. A theologian named Martin Luther, basing his reasoning on good scholarship and careful reasoning, rejected the notion that a person could establish their relationship with God only through the Catholic Church. He advanced the novel idea that people could establish a closer relationship with God and the teachings of Jesus through direct examination of both the New Testament and their own conscience.
This is pretty much taken for granted nowadays. Bu it was appallingly heretical by the Catholic hierarchy when it first emerged. They had no way of fitting it into their worldview. It challenged the Church's monopoly over Christian thought. The idea that a person could find their own relationship with the Almighty without the intervention of clergy was anathema. So they branded Protestants as heretics, Satan-worshippers, etc. - as it was the only way they could fit Protestantism within their limited worldview. They were psychologically incapable of of seeing the good points of this argument or understanding that a person could be both a good Christian and a non-Catholic.
The same thing is happening with the challenge to feminism that the men's rights movement presents. The MRM breaks the monopoly in the debate over how gender is 'constructed' and/or how equality is achieved. The MRM posits that men have their own concerns, their own worldviews, their goals and ways of breaking out of gender stereotypes and roles assigned to men, their own take on equality and human rights. That one can be both in favor of human rights for women as well as for men.
This seems to be extremely threatening on an intellectual level to some (not all) people who profess to be feminists. They assume that gender roles, constructs and relationships can only be examined within a framework of feminist thought. Some of them simply don't know how to fit the MRM into their worldview, not realizing – or perhaps, simply not accepting - that it's their worldview that is in need of adjustment. Their discomfort and confusion drives them to search relentlessly for the smallest nugget of evidence to brand MRAs as misogynist, homophobic and racist. In the same way the Protestant challenge drove the Catholic hierarchy to brand all Protestants as in league with the devil.
It's easier that way. There is nothing you have to change in your worldview. Nothing you have to re-think. Nothing that has to change.
The confusion and discomfort is also evident when they make claims like, 'If you want to achieve better rights and conditions for males, you must do it through feminism and by working with feminists.' It's like the Catholic Church saying to Luther, 'If you want to have a closer relationship with God, you must only do it through the Church.'
This person thinks you're a man because they are simply psychologically incapable of understanding the concept that a female can think men's concerns are important, too. So, in their mind, you must be a male.
[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Grubnar 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–]DevilishRogue 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]autourbanbot points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Here's the Urban Dictionary definition of Rule 16 :
A: Hey, I just spotted this hot chick!
B: Rule 16.
^(about) ^| ^(flag for glitch) ^| ^(Summon: urbanbot, what is something?)
[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]fengpi 4 points5 points6 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 8 points9 points10 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points (6 children) | Copy Link
[+]Imnotmrabut -8 points-7 points-6 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 3 points4 points5 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]Imnotmrabut 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]killerbake 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]iongantas 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]btmims 1 point2 points3 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]atred 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DevilishRogue 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]atred 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Kuramo 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Incident-Pit 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Rethgil 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+][deleted] -6 points-5 points-4 points (0 children) | Copy Link