I originally wrote this article for the site AVfM and it was published on 11/29/2011
How Feminism Capitalizes on Men’s Rights Movement Victories
Exposing feminist extremism helps to spread the MRM message. Large or outrageous acts of misandry will sometimes yank a few of the oblivious masses out of their stupor, causing them to sit up and take notice. We tend to look upon these events as small victories for the MRM as they almost always draw a handful of people to our cause. It is only natural that we would celebrate our exposing.
We are prone to become so caught up in our taking of a hill that we fall into the trap of thinking that the hill was a victory. I would suggest otherwise. In the fog of war against the male sex, we fail to see how extremist behavior provides a diversion from equally important issues. In some cases, the hills we charge serve to empower the more mainstream of feminists who are able to look normal in comparison to their extremist sisters. Attention is never drawn to the fact that it is always the MRM that first exposes these radicals. It is rarely stated that ‘moderate’ feminists remain utterly silent about their fringe elements proposals of male genocide until the plots have been exposed to the public eye. Only then do these mainstream feminists step into the spotlight to announce that not all feminists hold those beliefs. Feminists capitalize on misandry by presenting an image of disapproval when their radical sisters are brought to light, giving the world an impression that they themselves are the reasonable voice of feminism. Our skirmishes become victories for mainstream feminists as well.
About Me
- Brutal Antipathy and his property L
- Brutal Antipathy is a pseudonym for a blogger and forum debate enthusiast whose views often rest well outside of social baseline. A self confirmed atheist, misanthropist, and sadist, his commentary ranges from parched textbook facts to satire and sarcasm. He is a proponent of free speech and individual liberty even when these are taken to excess. His political views shift between lower case libertarian and enlightened despotism depending on the level of contempt he is feeling for his fellow humans at any given moment. His reading interests include history, general science, archaeology, comparative religion, psychology, & sociology. Other interests and hobbies include practicing various crafts, torturing his slave, blogging, playing with his dogs, collecting antiques, role playing & tactical simulation games, renaissance fairs, and cheerfully making other people miserable by holding up a mirror of their shortcomings and repeatedly bashing them in the face with it. L is the owned slave of BA. She basically has the same interests and views as her owner except in music.
Friday, September 20, 2013
Sunday, September 8, 2013
An Objection To Objectification Theory
Originally posted on my blog SkepTex on 11/20/12
Objectification theory, hitherto referred to as OT, is another linchpin of feminist theory. Like Patriarchy theory, it is poorly defined by way of its supposed effect, thought the effect is assumed to be a social construct and
The rough definition of OT is that Objectification is seeing or treating a person, usually a woman, as an object. There are 10 features of objectification, and it is unclear if more than one feature is needed to demonstrate an example of objectification. It is implied weakly in the article that only 1 of the features need be present, but this application renders the theory hopelessly vague, easily subject to interpretation and opinion. If OT proponents wish to use a single feature to proclaim objectification of an individual, it would be fair to state that their argument falls short of conjecture and enters the realm of ideological opinion. I would also like to posit that the features which I will list may have explanations other than objectification.
Objectification theory, hitherto referred to as OT, is another linchpin of feminist theory. Like Patriarchy theory, it is poorly defined by way of its supposed effect, thought the effect is assumed to be a social construct and
The rough definition of OT is that Objectification is seeing or treating a person, usually a woman, as an object. There are 10 features of objectification, and it is unclear if more than one feature is needed to demonstrate an example of objectification. It is implied weakly in the article that only 1 of the features need be present, but this application renders the theory hopelessly vague, easily subject to interpretation and opinion. If OT proponents wish to use a single feature to proclaim objectification of an individual, it would be fair to state that their argument falls short of conjecture and enters the realm of ideological opinion. I would also like to posit that the features which I will list may have explanations other than objectification.
Friday, September 6, 2013
Moral Panic For Fun & Profit: An Exercise In Evil
When I wrote this article it was originally published on the site AVfM 12/1/2011.
Let’s play a game. I want you to imagine for a while that we are a cabal of evil villains that have decided for nefarious purposes to create a state of moral panic. Not that myself or any other ethical person would ever actually put this into practice. We are only going to take a stroll down the road of hypothesis in order to see where it might lead us.
Let’s play a game. I want you to imagine for a while that we are a cabal of evil villains that have decided for nefarious purposes to create a state of moral panic. Not that myself or any other ethical person would ever actually put this into practice. We are only going to take a stroll down the road of hypothesis in order to see where it might lead us.
Thursday, September 5, 2013
Search For The Elusive Patriarchy
This post was originally published on my blog SkepTex back on 11/14/2012
In order to address the accusations that will follow, I should mention in advance my perspective on this subject, and perhaps more importantly, what angles I am not coming from.
I am a skeptic by nature, and much of what I have encountered of feminism has given me cause to be extremely skeptical of it. The hostility in which feminist's react to valid criticism, especially when much of that hostility is viscous character assassination and ad hominem, brought my suspicions to the surface years ago. Since that time, I have taken it upon myself to investigate many of their claims, and have found them to be lacking more often than not. In my research I have seen others write online articles on many of these topics in a piecemeal fashion. I am of the opinion that a more unified presentation of them together might have more of an impact than scattered refutations.
My assessment of feminism is not founded on religious ideology. I am an atheist, and do not subscribe to those notions. Neither is my position based on misogyny. I hold women in no less, or more, regard than I do men. I am in fact in a committed and mutually fulfilling relationship with a woman. My opinion is not based on right wing Conservative notions. My political views do not subscribe to any of the conventional or minor political parties.
I should also point out that I have no desire to turn back the clock and retract female equality. I believe that the Equality movement was a great step forward and was sorely overdue. I also believe that women, like men, must be vigilant in preserving their rights and health.
Women have gained numerous rights in America, and they are wise to continue preserving those rights through activism. But to hear feminists tell it, things remain terribly unequal. This is where I begin to draw the line.
In order to address the accusations that will follow, I should mention in advance my perspective on this subject, and perhaps more importantly, what angles I am not coming from.
I am a skeptic by nature, and much of what I have encountered of feminism has given me cause to be extremely skeptical of it. The hostility in which feminist's react to valid criticism, especially when much of that hostility is viscous character assassination and ad hominem, brought my suspicions to the surface years ago. Since that time, I have taken it upon myself to investigate many of their claims, and have found them to be lacking more often than not. In my research I have seen others write online articles on many of these topics in a piecemeal fashion. I am of the opinion that a more unified presentation of them together might have more of an impact than scattered refutations.
My assessment of feminism is not founded on religious ideology. I am an atheist, and do not subscribe to those notions. Neither is my position based on misogyny. I hold women in no less, or more, regard than I do men. I am in fact in a committed and mutually fulfilling relationship with a woman. My opinion is not based on right wing Conservative notions. My political views do not subscribe to any of the conventional or minor political parties.
I should also point out that I have no desire to turn back the clock and retract female equality. I believe that the Equality movement was a great step forward and was sorely overdue. I also believe that women, like men, must be vigilant in preserving their rights and health.
Women have gained numerous rights in America, and they are wise to continue preserving those rights through activism. But to hear feminists tell it, things remain terribly unequal. This is where I begin to draw the line.
Announcement
Over the next few days, L will be posting some writings I had done for AVfM and some from another blog I started on critical thinking and skepticism. I decided it would be best to merge them all here in one place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)