A feminist definition of abuse backfires

rightsbot · 2012-03-14T16:06:17+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

babygutz · 2012-03-14T19:28:07+00:00

It is the same as saying minorities can't be racist. Of course they can! And by there own definitions of such.

fernguts · 2012-03-15T03:57:24+00:00

Don't forget, they don't speak for all feminists any more than all MRAs speak for the rest of us.

DON'T fall into the trap of painting with a wide brush.

2012-03-15T01:15:06+00:00

minimizing, denying, blaming

Well any form of disagreement about anything is right out the window.

Naphthos · 2012-03-15T01:17:55+00:00

There is a nauseating level of hypocrisy that pervades every facet of society if one dares allow themselves to realize it. Feminism is just the tip of the iceberg.

RabidRaccoon · 2012-03-15T06:06:35+00:00

Using a feminist definition of abuse, it would appear that common feminist attacks on men's rights issues are abusive in nature.

Well, yeah.

Of course their response will be something like

"You don't understand the nature of oppressive speech, it is speech that reinforces and existing social system of domination"

They'll then link to Derailing for Dummies or some obscure blog with words redefined in new and subtly different ways from the way they are defined in a patriarchal dictionary. It actually reminds me of special relativity where the definition for length needs to change as you approach the speed of light to keep everything consistent. Well except for the fact that relativity is both empirically tested and useful for things like designing GPS satellites and the ideas I'm discussing here are complete horseshit that you should ignore.

Consider this Orwellian document.

http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/h8g0f/new_and_revised_antioppression_policy_take_two/

Oppression is defined as: any language or action that expresses, reinforces, upholds or sympathizes with any system of social domination, including, but not limited to ableism, cissexism (transphobia), racism, misogyny, heterosexism, etc.

Note misogyny is on the list but misandry is not. This is by design

http://www.reddit.com/r/metanarchism/comments/h8g0f/new_and_revised_antioppression_policy_take_two/c24rza4

provoko

This fails as a good policy, singles out misogyny, ignores misandry. Why don't you just say sexism?

foolsjourney

You missed the bit where it said "system of social domination".

So from their perspective the problem is not that you drank the Kool-Aid and ended up with a head full of contradictions, it's that you didn't drink enough of it. Once you've downed the whole cup then it's impossible for women to oppress men, but possible for men to oppress women because of the "system of social domination" clause. I.e. there are no contradictions. On the other hand you'll find it pretty much impossible to talk to anyone who hasn't drunk the Kool-Aid, because you're on the opposite side of some sort of ideological event horizon from them and everything you say will sound like it is full of contradictions to them.

I.e. in their ideology a system of social domination exists of women over men. So a man saying "bitches" even about other men is "oppression" and should be stopped, by force if necessary. However there is no system of domination of women over men, so a woman saying "dicks" is not oppression.

Now I'm explaining this shit because it was interesting to read about, but it doesn't mean I agree with it.

One problem is that the "system of social domination" is entirely subjective. So if you're in charge of stopping oppression you can always invent new ones to use an excuse to silence people you don't like.

And what's funny about this is that if you want the power to call things you don't like "oppression" which allows you to stop them by force you absolutely need to be in an oppressed group not an oppressor group. So you'll see people make up new and entirely fictional oppressed groups and claim to be in them just so that you have the power to silence people, something someone memorably described as "the oppression Olympics".

tl;dr - if you were in their cult then you wouldn't see their ideas as contradictory. On the other hand you really don't want to do that.

WhyYouAreDisparaged · 2012-03-15T07:23:47+00:00

That isn't a definition of abuse. It is a description of verbal tactics that the author believes are commonly used by people who she considers abusive.

It doesn't say: "People who minimize deny and blame are abusive"

It says: "People who are abusive often minimize deny and blame"

Suggesting that both abusers and feminists minimize deny and blame does not make feminists abusers anymore than suggesting that roses and firetrucks are both red proves that firetrucks are roses.

The fact that this is on the front page is embarrassing.

TracyMorganFreeman · 2012-03-14T16:14:11+00:00

[permanently deleted]

duglock · 2012-03-14T18:44:49+00:00

Sounds like someone very familiar.

Maschalismos · 2012-03-14T20:36:08+00:00

Logic is fun!

spokef · 2012-03-15T12:07:37+00:00

You're reversing the implication. The quote only says that abuse often implies minimizing, denying, and blaming. It doesn't say that they are a definition of abuse. Your last sentence is absurd since it relies on this false premise.

hollycatrawr · 2012-04-03T06:15:32+00:00

patriarchy hurts men too.

babygutz · 2012-03-14T19:28:07+00:00

It is the same as saying minorities can't be racist. Of course they can! And by there own definitions of such.

Amunium · 2012-03-14T19:42:09+00:00

Isn't this exactly what a lot of MRA's do when arguing against feminists? I certainly see enough of it around here to justify that claim.

mrfloopa · 2012-05-16T20:01:53+00:00

Damn, if only we took into consideration facts! Then those last statements might be found to be... true.

deeeeefinitelytrue · 2012-03-14T21:11:01+00:00

Good thing there's no minimizing, denying or blaming going on in this subreddit.

klarth · 2012-03-14T23:26:27+00:00

Your problems as men are minor compared to what women face (minimization).

actually true

Feminism did not contribute to your problems (denying).

actually true

We live in a patriarchy, so you men caused your own problems (blaming).

no feminist thinks this

0/10 try again

Title	A feminist definition of abuse backfires
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	367
Comments	160
Date	March 14, 2012 4:05 PM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/qwb78/a_feminist_definition_of_abuse_backfires/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/a-feminist-definition-of-abuse-backfires.1025938 https://theredarchive.com/post/1025938