Interesting post explaining how anti-MRAs "train" others to debunk anti-feminism. Notice the very convoluted and disingenuous language- something obviously logically flawed, but careful designed to win arguments.

HeForeverBleeds · 2017-04-17T16:32:28+00:00

The last one is the most telling:

Phony Plea to Equality

This one is the hardest to spot and the ones conservatives fall for the most. This can be best represented by any time an anti-feminist screams "what about the menz?". The best example are arguments about parity in domestic violence or rape... Counter: Show how feminism's definition of equality doesn't include theirs and why this is justified.

Flat out admitting that feminists' "equality" is not actually about treating the genders equally. Flat out saying that it's justified for feminists to dismiss the discrimination that males face, despite the parity in things they treat as women's issues like domestic violence and rape

Which is true: the whole idea of feminism is basically "equality" for women in areas where they're disadvantage, not equality for males and females in all areas. In other words aid women where inequality disadvantages them, but accept areas where inqeuality disadvantages men/advantages women

Mallago · 2017-04-17T15:45:02+00:00

What's scary about this is that the OP obviously knows that what they are saying is wrong. This sounds very much like the writing of a sociopath, exactly like what you'd expect from the people who intentionally use flawed logic to argument against prostate cancer research and screening.

TheSummerain · 2017-04-17T16:35:56+00:00

Regular poster in the hate sub r/againstmensrights

Deansdale · 2017-04-17T18:12:12+00:00

The idiot at least openly admits that feminism is a leftist movement. But confusing antifeminism with conservatism... And the sub is named BadSocialScience. What a fuckin' farce.

DaeusPater · 2017-04-17T19:41:39+00:00

devote all their time on spurious claims about false rape accusations, even though this is minute in comparison to actual rape accusations.

This is just femsplaining bullshit. Lets look at some statistics shall we? Out of all reports of rape and sexual assault, around 8% are false accusations and in around 5% of those cases, the accused is convicted in the first trial(may be acquitted in the next with further evidence). So the other 87% of cases are undecided or dropped or not taken up at all due to lack of evidence or obvious false accusation.

Now how do feminists interpret these statistics? In most feminist publications this will be reported as follows.

Out of every 100 rapists, only 5 will face legal sentences, the other 95 go scot free. [Notice the dishonesty, 'rapists' should be replaced with 'rape and sexual assault reports'. Only 5% cases have enough evidence to lead to a conviction, the other 95% are not rapists getting lucky and escaping justice; they include some true rape cases without enough evidence(either he-said-she-said or often minor sexual assaults, they don't leave much evidence) and some false accusations which were not proven false. Due process bitch, deal with it!]
Only 8% of rapes are false accusations. [again very dishonest, when we talk of false accusations, we talk of false reports and also false accusations in social, professional circles. False accusations outside of court are a lot more frequent. Also, statistically speaking, atleast 8% of cases are false accusations(not only). So anywhere between 8% - 95% are potential false accusations. That is a lot].

They take the famous slogan "equal pay for equal work" and assume that "women earn X cents on the man's dollar" means for the same work

How else are we supposed to interpret 'equal pay for equal work'? Have feminists lost the ability to comprehend English language? or are they willfully lying to push a victim narrative for women?

toxic masculinity: namely restrictive roles that hurt the men practicing them

Did you ever hear a feminist talk of toxic femininity? For example like gold diggers. Its almost like they are eager to paint masculinity as toxic, while never acknowledging femininity as toxic(if they do, somehow bring the blame back to men). It seems there is a massive surplus of focus on how men and masculinity are to blame for everything. Classic bigotry. And they have the nerve to ask me why I'm not a feminist!

Rethgil · 2017-04-17T20:55:31+00:00

There have been a lot of feminist lurkers on the MRA lately, and we've had mods warn us to be on the lookout for derailing, posters who have a relatively new account, or who usually don't post into this sub. Since Hilary lost feminists have been reported as using new tactics under the heading of 'by any means' which lately means infiltration to create disunity and dilute opinions to stop consensus forming.

girlwriteswhat · 2017-04-18T02:10:47+00:00

I'm in the process of reading the comments there, and it's mind-boggling.

One guy was in an hours long conversation with someone because he wanted them to present some evidence that patriarchy exists in the west, and the person kept saying that patriarchy is a scientific fact, not a theory, and needs to be accepted as true.

They then went on to compare his requests for evidence to a creationist's demand for photographic proof that a mosquito gave birth to a cow. The person kept calling him anti-science, because he was skeptical of the "scientific fact" of patriarchy.

They also described the guy's request as "It's like you've asked for evidence that there's a cat sitting on my head and you're rejecting all the evidence because by "cat" you mean "horse" and by "head" you mean "foot"."

Uh, no. He asked you to produce some evidence that there's a cat sitting on your head.

https://www.reddit.com/r/BadSocialScience/comments/659zfp/how_conservatives_argue_against_feminism_and_how/dgcpq9o/

Literally, "...no, scientific facts are literally the things we have to accept. We don't provide "evidence" for them."

And this person wants patriarchy to be considered a scientific fact. Oh, and let's not forget that this same person chided the questioner for citing the dictionary definition of patriarchy, while at the same time demuring as to the "scientific" definition of it until the questioner conceded that patriarchy was a "fact", not a theory. The gist of it seemed to be, "until you accept it as a fact, there's no point in telling you what the definition is. Also, learn how to science, facts are different from theories, and patriarchy is a fact not a theory."

Uh... things (nearly always) fall down when dropped. That's a fact. Gravity is a theory that attempts to explain how and why things fall down when dropped. It has incredible explanatory power because the few exceptions (helium/hot air balloons, things falling "sideways" in centrifuges, weightlessness in space, etc) do not interfere with the fundamental rules of gravity.

Men occupy most of the positions of power in society. That's a fact. Patriarchy is a theory that attempts to explain how and why men occupy most of the positions of power in society. It is not something we have to accept because we have to. It requires evidence.

This went on and on and on, with the feminist finally using the wage gap and male privilege as evidence that patriarchy exists. Patriarchy is "the idea that society views men as the default and confers a number of advantages to men at the expense of women based on their sex."

Our indefatigable questioner countered that the wage gap, as commonly portrayed, is bunkum and that both men and women in western societies have different advantages and disadvantages.

The response was that because the advantages of men can be described as male privilege and their disadvantages can be described as adverse effects of male privilege, and those of women cannot reasonably be considered in this way, therefore patriarchy.

But looking at the initial statement, that patriarchy the idea that society views men as the default and confers a number of advantages to men at the expense of women based on their sex, it can be argued that in many spheres of life (such as caregiving) women are considered the default and society confers a number of advantages to them at the expense of men based on their sex.

Are men considered the default in parenting? No. In teaching? No. In caring professions? No. In compassion? No. In who should be protected? No. In who should be assisted? No.

I am blown away. Mostly by the feminist's constant assertions that the questioner is being unreasonable.

TheCivilSoldier · 2017-04-17T21:05:13+00:00

Also, if you look to the first of the comments in the thread, the individual claims to be an anarchist. What a world we live in today.

mensmod · 2017-04-19T03:53:04+00:00

Please follow our posting policy regarding links to other places in Reddit.

Comments