Feminists are “Angry, Militant, Man-Hating Lesbians”

[Underseer]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friend...feminists-angry-militant-man-hating-lesbians/

No, it wasn't an atheist blogger on the Internet saying it this time. This time, it was an extremist conservative Christian judge.

So sad that it's getting hard to tell the two apart thanks to the growing anti-feminist sentiment among atheists. Remember when we used to be able to think of anti-woman sentiments as a theist thing? I miss those days.

 

[Metaphor]

So sad that it's getting hard to tell the two apart thanks to the growing anti-feminist sentiment among atheists. Remember when we used to be able to think of anti-woman sentiments as a theist thing? I miss those days.

What's sad is that the hateful rhetoric from fringe third-wave feminists combined with their championing of the victim-industrial complex and unironic acceptance of the most absurd postmodernist nonsense-on-stilts has drowned out many of the reasonable positions feminists take.

 

[barbos]

I am confused, atheists are anti-feminsts?

 

[laughing dog]

So sad that it's getting hard to tell the two apart thanks to the growing anti-feminist sentiment among atheists. Remember when we used to be able to think of anti-woman sentiments as a theist thing? I miss those days.

What's sad is that the hateful rhetoric from fringe third-wave feminists combined with their championing of the victim-industrial complex and unironic acceptance of the most absurd postmodernist nonsense-on-stilts has drowned out many of the reasonable positions feminists take.

Really? What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?

 

[Metaphor]

What's sad is that the hateful rhetoric from fringe third-wave feminists combined with their championing of the victim-industrial complex and unironic acceptance of the most absurd postmodernist nonsense-on-stilts has drowned out many of the reasonable positions feminists take.

Really? What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?

Have you ever spent an afternoon reading feministing?

 

[laughing dog]

Really? What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?

Have you ever spent an afternoon reading feministing?

That is drowning out reasonable positions?

 

[Metaphor]

Have you ever spent an afternoon reading feministing?

That is drowning out reasonable positions?

Do you think that the impression in the OP article was gained from listening to reasonable feminists, or does it seem more like an opinion you'd form if you'd been exposed to fringe feminists?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Sounds like an idiot to me, kind of like the guy who punched a Buddhist monk while ranting about Muslims. Some people are just ignorant assholes.

 

[Tigers!]

So sad that it's getting hard to tell the two apart thanks to the growing anti-feminist sentiment among atheists. Remember when we used to be able to think of anti-woman sentiments as a theist thing? I miss those days.

I never knew we had such days.

 

[laughing dog]

That is drowning out reasonable positions?

Do you think that the impression in the OP article was gained from listening to reasonable feminists, or does it seem more like an opinion you'd form if you'd been exposed to fringe feminists?

From the years in this forum, I think such an opinion could be formed from someone listening to the wind blow.

In any event, what does that have to do with fringe feminists drowning out reasonable feminists?

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Gets out wide, wide brush.

Right winged conservative judges are woman hating, homophobic, whiskey guzzling short-fingered morons.

 

[lpetrich]

Really? What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?

Have you ever spent an afternoon reading feministing?

Why don't you tell us? Both what you consider reasonable positions and what you consider fringe positions that are drowning them out.

 

[Metaphor]

Do you think that the impression in the OP article was gained from listening to reasonable feminists, or does it seem more like an opinion you'd form if you'd been exposed to fringe feminists?

From the years in this forum, I think such an opinion could be formed from someone listening to the wind blow.

In any event, what does that have to do with fringe feminists drowning out reasonable feminists?

I don't know what it is you are challenging, ld.

Are you challenging the notion that fringe feminists with unreasonable views exist? Or are you challenging the notion that their views drown out more reasonable views?

- - - Updated - - -

Have you ever spent an afternoon reading feministing?

Why don't you tell us? Both what you consider reasonable positions and what you consider fringe positions that are drowning them out.

It's reasonable for people to consent to sex before sex takes place.

It is wholly unreasonable to redefine personal sexual relations between consenting adults by demanding that people seek 'affirmative consent'.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

From the years in this forum, I think such an opinion could be formed from someone listening to the wind blow.

In any event, what does that have to do with fringe feminists drowning out reasonable feminists?

I don't know what it is you are challenging, ld.

Are you challenging the notion that fringe feminists with unreasonable views exist? Or are you challenging the notion that their views drown out more reasonable views?

Here's the question he asked you: "What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?"

Perhaps you could be specific so a reader can objectively test your claim.

 

[Metaphor]

I don't know what it is you are challenging, ld.

Are you challenging the notion that fringe feminists with unreasonable views exist? Or are you challenging the notion that their views drown out more reasonable views?

Here's the question he asked you: "What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?"

Perhaps you could be specific so a reader can objectively test your claim.

I have done so above.

 

[Juma]

It's reasonable for people to consent to sex before sex takes place.

It is wholly unreasonable to redefine personal sexual relations between consenting adults by demanding that people seek 'affirmative consent'.

The difference being what?

 

[bigfield]

It's reasonable for people to consent to sex before sex takes place.

It is wholly unreasonable to redefine personal sexual relations between consenting adults by demanding that people seek 'affirmative consent'.

The standard of affirmative consent, as it was codified by California and as it is advocated by various articles I just-this-moment read on Feministing, is pretty damned reasonable.

 

[Underseer]

I am confused, atheists are anti-feminsts?

Not in general, but there's a perfect example of what I'm talking about in the post above yours. That comment would not have been out of place at freerepublic nor any Christian message board.

- - - Updated - - -

What's sad is that the hateful rhetoric from fringe third-wave feminists combined with their championing of the victim-industrial complex and unironic acceptance of the most absurd postmodernist nonsense-on-stilts has drowned out many of the reasonable positions feminists take.

Really? What reasonable positions in feminism have been drowned out by fringe 3rd-wage feminists?

As far as the MRA and right wingnuts are concerned, any suggestion that women not be mistreated is evidence of a radical extremist feminist who oppresses men.

 

[Metaphor]

It's reasonable for people to consent to sex before sex takes place.

It is wholly unreasonable to redefine personal sexual relations between consenting adults by demanding that people seek 'affirmative consent'.

The difference being what?

If there is no difference between 'consent' and 'affirmative consent', then what the fuck is 'affirmative consent' and why does it matter if it's called 'consent' or 'affirmative consent'?

If there is a difference, why ought consensual sexual relations require something other than consent?

 

[Metaphor]

It's reasonable for people to consent to sex before sex takes place.

It is wholly unreasonable to redefine personal sexual relations between consenting adults by demanding that people seek 'affirmative consent'.

The standard of affirmative consent, as it was codified by California and as it is advocated by various articles I just-this-moment read on Feministing, is pretty damned reasonable.

Are 'consent' and 'affirmative consent' identical? If they are, the entire theatre around 'affirmative consent' is a ridiculous, pointless, stupendous waste of time.

If 'consent' and 'affirmative consent' are different, that means that when two people have sex, there might be consent but not affirmative consent. What does this mean? Is it rape if there's no affirmative consent? Isn't consent the only thing that is sufficient and necessary for sexual relations? If not, why not?