~ archived since 2018 ~

Simone de Beauvoir, Author of The Second Sex, Is A Nazi, A Pedophile, and A Misogynist.

Tony_MRA

April 14, 2015

12 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Simone de Beauvoir, Author of The Second Sex, Is A Nazi, A Pedophile, and A Misogynist.
Author	Tony_MRA
Upvotes	12
Comments	5
Date	April 14, 2015 5:10 AM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/32j4y2/simone_de_beauvoir_author_of_the_second_sex_is_a/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/simone-de-beauvoir-author-of-the-second-sex-is-a.983093 https://theredarchive.com/post/983093

Comments

[–]Sanguifer -4 points-3 points-2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

And all three matter not one bit.

I repeat what I already said on AVFM before they banned me for it: Don't do this shit. What does this have to do with anything?

De Beauvoir was a Nazi - and so were quite a lot of people in that time. So what? To make an analogy - Jefferson was a racist slaveholder, let us burn the Declaration of Independence?

De Beauvoir was a paedophile - and again, nothing follows from it. She wasn't a paedophile because of her feminism. She was a feminist and a paedophile.

And a misogynist? Come on. Because she said no woman should have the choice to stay at home and depend on a husband? Guess all the MGTOWs are misandrist, then, because they say marriage is never a good option for a man.

Most importantly - one day, a prominent MRA will get caught doing some immoral or illegal shit. It is just a matter of time, because being an MRA does not make You holy. And at that time, Feminists will screech and parade that around. See what they did with Rodgers, who wasn't even an MRA. Now imagine a Rodgers who actually was a columnist at AVFM. Can You imagine the response?

Good. Now, when You guys inevitably say that future kind of Rodgers does not represent the MHRM, I will be there, ready to quote the link to this article under every single one of those responses.

Unless You stop this kind of ad-hominem bullshit.

[–]ralphswanson 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Sanguifer 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm skeptical about that. I've seen this with the Atheism+ fiasco.

The fact that this is just getting into a "no You!" contest - and we all know how well shit sticks to MRAs and how easily it bounces off of feminists, so we can only lose that one - aside, this invites the entirely wrong type of people into the group. People who don't care about Men's Rights - they just don't like feminists.

And this, in turn, wouldn't even be that bad. But consider this: This is the sort of people who will have a knee-jerk reaction because "Oh no, pedophiles! Think of the CHILDREN!". How, precisely, are they different from the pro-forma feminists who say: "Oh no, rapists! Think of the WOMEN!"? They still jerk a knee, it's just a different knee.

Also consider this: When those people talk about castrating the child rapists and hanging the pedophiles... are they talking about women, or men? Because call me crazy, but I'd rather think it's usually the male pedophiles who get lynched. Well. Or alleged pedophiles. Or pedophiles who didn't actually molest any children. Or pediatricians who get mistaken for pedophiles. I think You get what I'm trying to say here - just like with "rape culture", "pedophile danger" gets blown way out of proportion when compared to actual crime statistics, and it's pretty much entirely men who suffer from the hysteria. Malicious false allegations of child molestation, like those of rape, do happen, and the mere allegation can be enough to ruin a reputation - or a life.

All this taken together makes me very wary of the "think of the children" and "hang the pedophiles!" emotional responses.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Sanguifer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

A question to You: If the author instead found out that De Beauvoir was a member of the White Rose, a semi-egalitarian, and a model citizen with no record of sexual misconduct at all - would that somehow make her ideas about feminism valid? If not, why does it matter if she's the opposite?

Criticize the ideas, not the people behind them.

I understood the article perfectly well. No, You do not get all that from just reading "The Second Sex". I read that piece of shit, and 95% of it is drivel. But You don't get any of those things from that book. You get those things by setting out to do research about a person, looking for the most dirt You can shovel up.

This is what is called a "smear campaign", or a "hit piece". This is what MRAs - rightfully! - complain about when an MRA publicly talks about MRA issues, and the press coverave is full of "Elliot Rodgers" "1 in 5" "Paul Elam wants to "bash bitches"" - dodging the issues at hand, going for the low hanging fruit instead.

It's so easy to shout ~~MISOGYNI~~ I'm sorry, PAEDOPHILE!, then let guilt by association and arguments from emotions do the dirty work. It's also a detestable, intellectually dishonest tactic, and I am furious - furious! - whenever I see MRAs doing that. Because I hold them to higher standards, because I think they are right more often than not.

When a feminist pulls a stunt like that, I just think "Oh, is it tuesday again?". When AVFM is resorting to this sort of tactics, it's a major disappointment.