The consequence of turning femanine equality into an ideology

[Bring4th_Austin]

"Full stop" I am sure. Way to imply that an obviously generalized statement is an unforgivable crime that invalidates all the points made.

Whether I hate women, which I do not, is irrelevant to my claims. Whether they are "hateful" is besides the point. If you were not being disingenuous, you would not use my generalized statement to dismiss the truth of what I said. English is a heavily idiomatic language, generalizations are convenient, and a blunt rhetorical delivery is far more effective than being ignored by making dispassionate factual claims. As is demonstrated in this thread.

Why should I patronize people by trying to refine and sugarcoat everything I say? Why deny the catalyst?

This discussion could go around in circles. Accusing Jade of being disingenuous could in itself be painted as a disingenuous statement in order to avoid the truth of what she’s saying.

Your post was not removed because it was “misinterpreted” (intentionally or otherwise) as not being a general statement. Even as general statements, there was full agreement among the mods (and more) that your words were intolerant, whether you define them as such or not. It wasn’t about sugarcoating or not sugarcoating. That you didn’t sugarcoat it simply made it easier for us to recognize it as something that was against the guidelines of this forum.

And the truth is, yes there are women who are lazy, and yes, they do abuse men, boys and girls to obscure their laziness by making themselves irreplaceable as the stay-at-home caregiver (confuse men by inducing insane desire that turns into marriage aka state violence sponsored slavery or "adversary relationships" as Ra puts it, and use violent love to induce attachment in children). Making this claim is not hateful, it is a critically important observation for the benefit of both sexes.

This was not the claim your post was making. It went far beyond simply pointing out some observed behaviors.

Claiming my post was "hateful" and "intolerant" is projection. It is you who can not tolerate my views, since for women it is always MEN, or abstract notions like "societal indoctrination" that are to blame. I brought something new to the table, and it is is not nearly as "neat and tidy" as elementary feminist rhetoric.

Your post was not removed simply because it was something “new” to think about. The wide range of different views shared on this forum about many differing topics, including gender equality, should be evidence enough that we didn’t simply remove it because we disagreed with it.

The reason I am making the claims I do is because I happen to have enough of a stomach and adequate intellectual curiosity to read about it. Has anyone heard of JudgyBitch (emphasis on link) ? Did anyone care to look into Anatomy of Female Power? The Manipulated Man (written by a woman no less)? The "Religion is a Confidence Trick" blog is indeed cavalier, but one thing it is not is hateful.

The argument that “because I read about it, it makes it right” just doesn’t make sense. There is a lot of hard-hitting intellectual rhetoric in plenty of intolerant sources of information. You can find some incredibly impressive intellectual and logical acrobatics making arguments in favor of racism, sexism, or any other intolerant type of speech, and then backed up with “well it’s logical, I’m smart and read about it, thus if you disagree, you just can’t stomach the truth.” That’s just not how it works.

Because “I happen to have enough of a stomach and adequate intellectual curiosity,” I do spend a lot of time reading anti-feminist sources, “red pill” websites, MRA communities – almost as much as I do staying involved with feminist sources and communities. It might surprise you to hear me say that I think a lot of these anti-feminist, anti-progressive arguments are addressing things that do desperately need discussed within progressive communities.

But the way these subjects are approached, from an “anti-feminist” perspective, is almost always undermining of the actual point that could use discussed and is coopted by traditional masculine supremacy, white supremacy, regressive, and ethno-centric rhetoric.

Whether you intended it or not, your post very much fell in-line with this. It went beyond simple critique of feminism and was typical of the rhetoric that engenders intolerant attitudes. I found the links you shared to also fall into this same category.

We do not want Bring4th to be a platform for bigotry. A lot of bigotry is shared in the guise of “only offering an alternative view” or “only wanting what is best for everyone.” The post you made would be a powerful seed for further intolerant speech.

My post was focused on mothers, not necessarily because I primarily attribute the problem to mothers (functionally unimportant); but because in my view nobody ever wants to even consider their culpability.

It actually did primarily attribute the problem to mothers, citing them as the “source” of all of these woes.