quote:

---

Because you see there is nothing on earth
That we could say that has any worth
Unless we have a male perspective with which
To see our concerns are a source of mirth.

---

*ROFL*

I think you have written this to be deliberately provocative, at least, I hope that's true.

Let's take your observations one by one. For instance, I think very few people would deem women who want equal pay femi-nazis. Equal pay is just common sense, if you think about it. It's only a few nuts who don't agree.

#2 - The thing about being worried about walking down the street - hey, if you feel worried, that's your right, certainly. Maybe you should. However, I would suggest men only feel "demonized" when it is suggested they are all "potentional rapists" and the like. This is akin to saying we are all potentional terrorists, or potentional murders, or potentional members of biker gangs. Believe it or not, I have never raped anyone, nor have I any intention of doing so. Neither have my friends... to my knowledge.

Item #3 - I think no one would suggest you put your experiences with violence behind you without a care. At least no one with a scrap of common sense.

Item #4 - Few intelligent people in this day and age believe women are "asking for it" when they are sexually assaulted. Come off it.

Item #5 - I don't think men deny women the right to discuss things that are important to them. However, I think PEOPLE (both men and women) get riled when it is suggested one sex or the other be excluded from public discussions. Hey, that's just human nature. (We're all, uh, humans right ? -- as well as being men and women.)

Item #6 - This stuff about being a "source of mirth" - come on, talk about having a chip of your shoulder. How many people do you really know who find the concerns of women a "source of mirth"? I thought so....

quote:

---

Our stories are that which shape our lives
They've lead us to this day
And those stories can not be silenced
Nor our spirit borne away.

---

This sounds like something borrowed from discussions about First Nations people. Indirect cultural appropriation, anyone?

quote:

---

I think very few people would deem women who want equal pay femi-nazis. Equal pay is just common sense, if you think about it. It's only a few nuts who don't agree.

---

Wow! Thanks for telling us this, do you mind now telling us why about 15million women in this country and plenty more worldwide are being paid lower than men. A FEW nuts? I flunked math, but I know it has to be a little more than a FEW! Cripes!

quote:

---

#2 - The thing about being worried about walking down the street - hey, if you feel worried, that's your right, certainly. Maybe you should. However, I would suggest men only feel "demonized" when it is suggested they are all "potentional rapists" and the like. This is akin to saying we are all potentional terrorists, or potentional murders, or potentional members of biker gangs. Believe it or not, I have never raped anyone, nor have I any intention of doing so. Neither have my friends... to my knowledge.

---

That's it! TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE. I'd like to believe that all the males I know are complete angels too, but with stats pointing the other way, I know that a few of those guys have done something I'd personally see them slingshot across the galaxy for. Hell, my partner who is VERY aware of the issues gives men dirty looks because he knows that there are a heck of a lot of rapists, beaters, and jerks who feel unduly entitled to supremecy over women. You still don't think so...go look at some stats compiled by a rape crisis centre, the police, StatsCan, the UN. I think I have plenty good reason to warn off any guy who looks at my sidewise.

quote:

---

Item #3 - I think no one would suggest you put your experiences with violence behind you without a care. At least no one with a scrap of common sense.

Item #4 - Few intelligent people in this day and age believe women are "asking for it" when they are sexually assaulted. Come off it.

---

This obviously comes from someone who has spent either zip amount of time in working with survivors of violence, or someone who did and learned nothing! Currently as it stands I get at least 10 women calling me a week in crisis and so many other sources (police, doctors, lawyers) who DON'T BELIEVE THEM! This is reality, not some dreamt up Jerry Falwell version of women running amok casting spells and having sex with one another, meantime the men get the scraps!

As for item four...HA!!! That is such bunk! Ever been to a rape trial, how about two or three? Want to know what they're using as a defense? consent!!! I am privvy to being taught by some of the of the most experienced feminists in the province on the very topic of rape, and to this very day, there are women who have been invalidated some way or another by some dolt who thinks that it's somehow now magically impossible to do so, and minimalising their experience to a flippant comment about how she may have asked for it.

quote:

---

Item #5 - I don't think men deny women the right to discuss things that are important to them. However, I think PEOPLE (both men and women) get riled when it is suggested one sex or the other be excluded from public discussions. Hey, that's just human nature. (We're all, uh, humans right ? -- as well as being men and women.)

---

I know of a few women's groups that use a group and caucus technique, and once the woman (myself included) got past their own petty feelings of not being included in a marginalised group so that woman may feel safe to talk freely, I felt quite happy with this process. My petty feelings lasted about 1 hour, how long are you going to carry this for? I'm sorry if I don't have much pity for some poor poor man who's so oppressed by us feminazis.

You say you're not denying women the right to speak, but how about controlling (or an attempt, thankfully these women are far too smart for this attempt)? That's what you're trying to do now, you're telling someone to stop whining and that their feelings are neurotic and self indulgant and that somehow her feelings on the topic invalidates years of work by other feminists. Funny enough, you start with "all due respect" there's nothing respectful in your post to this woman. Your condescending attitude and snarky remarks are the very REASON why feminists young and old will continue to hammer away at patriarchy so that one day men like you will not have one iota (or feel like they do) of power over any woman.

quote:

---

the word is spelled neither, not "niether"....

---

quote:

---

potentional terrorists, or potentional murders, or potentional

---

quote:

---

overmuch

---

quote:

---

undoes

---

Finally,

quote:

---

This sounds like something borrowed from discussions about First Nations people. Indirect cultural appropriation, anyone?

---

"Because you see there is nothing on earth
That we could say that has any worth
Unless we have a male perspective with which
To see our concerns are a source of mirth."

I hope that was a troll hit-and-run...

or else it's going to know we left some food for it.

Shenanigans and the rest of the fabulous "feminazis" -
I know it's hard, but if you don't feed the troll, it might just go back under it's rock...

quote:

---

So feminazis one and all
We will speak our truth
We will support all our sisters
From the wisest crone to the youngest youth

Our stories are that which shape our lives
They've lead us to this day
And those stories can not be silenced
Nor our spirit borne away.

---

YAY!!!! editied to add -- I aspire to be a feminazi. (Maybe remove the nazi from that.)

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: skadie ]

quote:

---

Stevendude: you are either very naive and travel in very insular circles, or you are not very bright.

---

Edited to add: Great poem Earthmum.

[ October 10, 2002: Message edited by: Rebecca West ]

quote:

---

Can someone please explain to me why it is acceptable to associate feminists with Nazi's.

---

I don't think militant feminists gave themselves the knickname but it was an insulting way to put a feminst in her place. It's like that rule about brining up Hitler in a thread. The idea was to make feminst seem rabid, unbending, etc.

So I appropriated the term.

Yes nazi has bad associations and that is the point that people like him try to make.

quote:

---

I detest the term "evil". It's too subjective and often abused.
Nazism is an example of militant idealism, and that is what the term has come to mean in our popular culture. I don't think this is necessarily incorrect. I think it should remind us that any ideals, no matter how "lofty" and "well-meaning", can get out of control, and turn very ugly.

---

So feminists make light of this, like gay people of "queer", originally an insult.

I can see your point, taking the piss, but most people wouldn't see it this way, regardless of the context, and lets face it, feminists aren't well known for having a great sense of humour.

quote:

---

feminists aren't well known for having a great sense of humour.

---

Gee, I must have missed that chapter in the Feminist Manifesto. Note to self: Never be funny again. Angela, I haven't a clue what your talking about.

The average woman who wants to hold a job, be paid accordingly, vote, own property, not be beaten by her spouse, get a divorce and keep her children is a feminist. After that there are division but that doesn't mean we don't have a sense of humor.

An in the face of such a slur as Feminazi, what should we do? Oh poor me, a mean man was nasty to me. Screw that, anyone who means that term literal is beyond reason and I won't take time out of my humorless life to spare him any time, instead I will be facetious.

quote:

---

feminists aren't well known for having a great sense of humour.

---

Angela, the word queer was once a slur to demean homosexual men. It is not any more. Not because homophobes have all gone away but because queers engaged their sense of humor and adopted the word. They co-opted it, so to speak.

So if feminists want to call claimn the term femi-nazi for themselves, to reclaim it, I would say it is a demonstration of good humour.

quote:

---

You cannot generalize the term nazi. I just do not accept your view that it has become the parlance of choice for evil. I hope that all women would rail agaist this manner to describe them. Never mind that it attacks feminist values but to associate feminism with nazism is so sick...

---

One image "feminazi" evokes in me is: rows of stern-faced women goose-stepping in unison. An image both scary and emboldening - depending on where you're standing.

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: satana ]

quote:

---

The term "nazi" had already been irreclaimably appropriated by popular culture before "feminazi" was coined. Most people today no longer associate "nazi" with European nationalist socialist philosophy.
One image "feminazi" evokes in me is: rows of stern-faced women goose-stepping in unison. An image both scary and emboldening - depending on where you're standing.

---

I have to disagree.

I think the use of the term nazi (be it self-applied or adapted from a perjorative) in any context does nothing but muddy the goals of those who adapt it. And Satana I think the term nazi has a very specific relationship with its historical usage, conjuring up truly vile imagery in a great number of people.

And unlike "queer" there is no positive message conveyed by being identified as a nazi of some stripe.

Do women or feminists (or anyone for that matter) really want to be likened to goose-stepping nazi thugs and all that represents? I rather doubt it.

This is one term that, all efforts to do so aside, cannot be softened or appropriated to make it more palatable. It just can't be done

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Tommy Shanks ]

quote:

---

I am a feminazi
Least that is what they say
Because I believe in women's right
Like equal work needs equal pay

---

A few comments on the comments:

1. on the "no one says women were asking for it," I recall in the recent past:
- lack of "bonnets and crinolines" as an excuse for sexual assault (by judge)
- Italian judge who dismissed sexual assault charge because the victim was wearing jeans, and as he told everyone its impossible to rape a woman wearing tight jeans. If she struggles, there is no way he could get them off. She must have cooperated.
- police officer who assaulted a 14 year old aboriginal girl IN A POLICE STATION in the 60's being excused for his action by many because it was a different time, and he thought she wanted it, and she never said no
- and on, and on.

2. did a paper on a website all about feminazis (
feminazi.com) which can be considered funny if this guy weren't so angry. Considering the people who use it, I don't like the word or particularly want to reclaim it, but then again I also dont like "cunt", and refuse to use it. Difference of opinion.

3. On the word queer, the Simpsons said it best:
Homer on gays : They're embarrassing me. They're embarrassing America. They turned the Navy into a floating joke. They ruined all our best names like Bruce, and Lance, and Julian. Those were the toughest names we had! Now they're just, uh ...
John : Queer?
Homer : Yeah, and that's another thing! I resent you people using that word. That's our word for making fun of you! We need it!

Knowing I cannot top the wisdom of Homer, I will simply end here.

Edited to say: I realize that points 2 and 3 seem contradictory. After all, pissing off those who want to use the word in a derrogatory fashion is one of the points of reclaming a word. I have to wonder what it says about me that I as a heterosexual support the reclamation of queer, coming from a large part of the LGBT community (many of whom feel queer is less confining than specific labels like lesbian, or bisexual, etc.) but reject efforts to reclaim cunt and feminazi for myself even as I consider myself part of the feminist movement? Must now go ponder.

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: swirrlygrrl ]

I'm not usually angry (as most of my other posts seem to attest too, usually its just the opposite).

Its just that throwing around the term nazi to describe anything or anyone really gets me going.
I think the language and terms that were created in that cauldron of evil should be used less cavalierly thats all.

Sorry If I seemed hectoring.

And I agree totally with the Simpsons check.

[ October 11, 2002: Message edited by: Tommy Shanks ]

I don't want to be identified with Nazis.

The term is used by people to discredit those who believe in feminism.

I choose it for the poem based on a few threads that were running and the opinion of a now gone poster who some current posters where reminding me of.

Other points that have been brought up have been answered beautifully by others.

So, it outrages me that some anti-feminist out there coined the term.

However, using the offensive term against feminists can be made futile. I simply say...

"IF a feminazi is a woman who won't shut up when you tell them to, IF a feminazi is a woman who demands equality, IF a feminazi is a woman who doesn't want to be beaten by a man, IF a feminazi is a woman who wants to be able to earn a living and provide for her children, IF a feminazi is a woman who wants to be safe in this world...

...THEN that's what I am."

I doubt that earthmother would actually regularly use the term to describe herself or the movement of feminism. She used it in a poem that was directed at those who call her a "feminazi". The term in that context had a specific purpose, and although it may offend, it certainly isn't earthmother who the indignation should be directed at...

quote:

---

(sorry if I'm being presumptuous, earthmother).

---

Rosebuds

Feminazi contains the link to Nazi's and the issues that go along with the term, so it becomes a much harder term to appropriate.

So you're suing for gender discrimination...but you're not a feminist. Right.

Made me sick.

Oh, and if someone called me a feminazi, I'd probably never speak to him/her again. You just don't throw that word ("Nazi") around.

[ October 14, 2002: Message edited by: Smith ]

I guess it's because I did quite a bit of dabbling into the Wiccan religion where the word crone is used to personify the aged and wise woman. Although she may have lost the modern commodity of youth, in Wiccan culture she is equally valuable and beautiful.

I'd say the word crone, which was originally complimentary, has been appropriated (just like the word "witch") by the bad guys. That's why it might have negative connotations for some.

And as for "anarchists" even left people mistakenly believe it is synonoumous with chaos and violence. That after over a century has gone by since the "direct action" of the few that targeted fashionable rich peoples restaurants for violence.

I don't mind the word "crone," but I associate it with very old women. I wouldn't want to see it indiscriminately applied to every woman with crow's feet around her eyes, as if we're over the hill the minute we hit forty.

[ October 15, 2002: Message edited by: Smith ]

quote:

---

I don't mind the word "crone," but I associate it with very old women. I wouldn't want to see it indiscriminately applied to every woman with crow's feet around her eyes, as if we're over the hill the minute we hit forty.

---

In general, I think it is bad strategy to "appropriate" insults; for one thing, it has the effect of taking the sting out of the original word, including the suffix. A case in point is the poster, above, who thinks that "Nazi" means "militant idealist." The mind boggles.

That word by the way being the springboard to show the ignorance of people who fail to recognize the real and present dangers and difficulties women face in this and other societies.

So for those offended by the word, well I am too.

I am offended by those who disregard the stories and realities of women dealing with violence and struggle and financial difficulties and daycare issues and all the other things that get short shrift.

quote:

---

I hope you don't take my personal aversion to the term crone (and to Wicca, and other "idealist" and "archetypal" varieties of feminism, being an old red atheist socialist-feminist at heart) as a criticism of your fine and funny writing.

---

No not at all. In fact the goes to prove the point I often try to make that feminists are not made out of cookie cutters. We each have our own approach and feelings on different things.

Supporting each other isn't the same as always agreeing with or seeing things the same way.

The words pagan and heathen had a "sting" for a long time in western society. Today that sting is largely gone.

[ 19 March 2005: Message edited by: Rev. Phoenix ]

“Feminazi.” OK, well, I know what Nazis are/were. I’m no expert on feminism, but I have met and worked with quite a few, and they range all across the spectrum—from solid down-to-earth social justice activists to total whacko nut bars. But that seems the usual case in every social trend.

It seems the term “Nazi,” as the old World War II generation passes on, has become more of a generic term for anything or anyone who is anti-democratic, anti-socialist and a rigid authoritarian or totalitarian, who often hold harshly bigoted and intolerant views of others. When I get mad at something I read, I may call the BC Liberals “NaziLibs” or the US Republican Party the “Nazi Party of America.”

But put the two together? I suppose it means a feminist, as in someone who, in some way, supports the advancement of women, or at least a privileged few women, but who hates democracy and mutual respect, opposes unions and other working class public interest movements, or think of herself as somehow superior to others.

Ladies like Kim Campbell, Margaret Thatcher, Condolessa Rice, Martha Stewart, Peggy Whittey, Madeline Albright, Barbara Amiel, etc. come to mind here: women that control large sums of wealth and wield a lot of undemocratic power and influence. These types would hardly support something like Pay Equity, a key issue for most trade union women, many of whom would call themselves feminists. In fact, in the case of the first two, they made their political careers suppressing these rights.

I suppose “Feminazi” conduct is like what’s being discussed here, as in say those who say “all men are sexist” or “all men are potential rapists.” That sounds like Guilt by Association, a key way the Nazis used to persecute Jews, Slavics, etc. (or, closer to home, what the government used to intern thousands of Japanese citizens, and put many Italians, including two of my uncles, and Germans under house arrest during WW II).

I remember a few years ago, after listening to an argument between some people over male violence against women and whether all men are in some way guilty because of rape, etc., looking for some stats on rape and who commits it.

While I didn’t find anything specific on that crime, I did find some interesting figures from Statistics Canada that said an estimated seven per cent of the male population will commit some form of violent crime, including rape and other violence against women, in their lives (this included both convictions and estimated non-reported incidents). It said two per cent of women are in this category.

While any percentage is unnerving, it’s obvious the percentage of violent offenders is low. So clearly it’s totally illegitimate to say the men collectively rape or beat or in other ways physically harm women.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying for a second that male violence against women isn’t real or important. In fact, I was livid when the BC Liars (my other name for the NaziLibs) closed down the women’s center here, and I’m working with a bunch of folks to try to find investment money to reopen it.

But I guess what I’m trying to do here is figure out the difference between a feminist and a “Feminazi.”

It's obvious she is writing about what others who oppose or don't respect her point of view supposedly call her when she tries to express herself or advocate for rights for women (like pay equity).

If the pic won't load click here...

[ 19 March 2005: Message edited by: Radices ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
Excellent. You write to Rush Limbaugh and others who use it as a term of abuse against feminists, and we'll be right behind you.

The poem in THIS thread is lashing out at people who use the term, so you shouldn't have any problem with it at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lena:
FemiNazis are abundantly present in secular, unChristian circles..... they are usually the ones who refuse to debate that unborn human beings have a right to life.... they refuse to hear anything about embryology, legal theory, philosophy, theology, medical ethics, objecctive morality, socioeconomy, psychiatry etc.... They are fascists because they hold a thin ideology to the exclusion of all other voices (even ones based in common sense)..... no surprise when there exists a great absence in personal relationship with Jesus Christ on their part

---

I mean, feminism only creates more devisiveness between the sexes. I think everything should be color blind, gender blind, and every other kind of blind, except talent blind.

quote:

---

I mean, feminism only creates more devisiveness between the sexes. I think everything should be color blind, gender blind, and every other kind of blind, except talent blind.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by conservativemark:
instead of being feminists, shouldn't we all just be humanists?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lena:
FemiNazis are abundantly present in secular, unChristian circles..... they are usually the ones who refuse to debate that unborn human beings have a right to life.... they refuse to hear anything about embryology, legal theory, philosophy, theology, medical ethics, objecctive morality, socioeconomy, psychiatry etc.... They are fascists because they hold a thin ideology to the exclusion of all other voices (even ones based in common sense)..... no surprise when there exists a great absence in personal relationship with Jesus Christ on their part

---

Gee. How did I miss this?

quote:

---

Originally posted by conservativemark:
instead of being feminists, shouldn't we all just be humanists?

I mean, feminism only creates more devisiveness between the sexes. I think everything should be color blind, gender blind, and every other kind of blind, except talent blind.

Do away with feminism. Everyone is equal until they make decisions that start their own inequality.

---

People make decisions that bring inequality down on themselves? Oh, how blind I've been!

I mean, from my early years I've been making such enormously bad choices! That used car salesman who groped me while I was serving coffee at my part-time waitressing job when I was 16 -- How could that not be my own fault? I should have known that working an unskilled part time job at minimum wage would include more indignity than just having to clean up people's half-eaten food.

And naturally, it's my own fault my high school counsellor told me that being a nice little secretary or office manager would be a good choice for me instead of that foolish dream of going to university, while telling the boy who lived down the street that he should go to university and take engineering. After all, he only had an average 10 marks lower than mine. I'm sure I must have done something to deserve it.

And that boss I had at a non-profit org, the one who told me to wear a short skirt because some key funders were coming in and might like a better view of my legs. Serves me right for having legs at all -- should have had them amputated when I had the chance, really. My own fault.

And the mechanic who wants to charge me more to fix my car for the same problem as my male friend's car. That's gottta be me, too, right? I must have decided to do something that made him try to gouge me on the bill. Shouldn't have even thought about taking the car in myself. Should have found a nice, big, strong man do it for little, delicate me. Foolish of me!

Because we're never, ever treated with inequality without having done SOMETHING to bring it on ourselves. Of course not.

Thank you! Thank you, conservativemark! I SEE THE LIGHT!!!!!

[ 19 March 2005: Message edited by: Zoot ]

quote:

---

Everyone is equal until they make decisions that start their own inequality.

---

Oh I get it. So the 95 per cent us who decide to live our lives as productive working class people, taking up a trade or profession, risk our economic futures and security, stimulate the economy through our mostly non-profit investment of consumer and tax dollars, create a culture and community, CHOOSE to be inferior to the corporate dictatorship that ends up controlling the money we earn, overly influencing the government we pay for, creating economic situations we can't control (adding to our economic risks) and sucking ever more wealth out of the economy we create and blackmailing us with it.

quote:

---

instead of being feminists, shouldn't we all just be humanists?

---

Does that mean you conservatives might actually entertain the idea of democratizing our economy, giving workers more say in the running of the things that effect the quality of our lives and our very existence, instead of busting our unions and gutting hard-won standards and rights?

If you do, then there's a lot more creeping socialism within the ranks of conservative forces than I had thought.

quote:

---

I think everything should be color blind, gender blind, and every other kind of blind, except talent blind.

---

Would you like this as a fundamental right for all not subject to any special interest considerations?

If you do, then you might have to dump the long-held conservative position of giving bosses and other undemocratic authority absolute power of hiring, firing, investing, discriminating, etc.

You sure, as a self-described conservative, you are ready to do that?

quote:

---

I think everything should be color blind, gender blind, and every other kind of blind, except talent blind.

---

quote:

---

They are fascists because they hold a thin ideology to the exclusion of all other voices (even ones based in common sense)..... no surprise when there exists a great absence in personal relationship with Jesus Christ on their part

---

Well, this is a real peach. Talk about yer hypocrisy.

I don't doubt there are those kinds of feminists out there who hate democracy (although none of the ones I know in my community are anything like that).

But if you want to worry about some really big example of holding "a thin ideology to the exclusion of all other voices (even ones based in common sense)" and other forms of suppression of free thought, let's look at those great trigger-happy US "Christian" fundamentalists, that bastion of democracy The Vatican, the God-loving yet Stalinist Russian Orthox Chruch or the Apartheid-supporting Calvinist Clergy, those beloved former CIA buddies turned rampagers the "Islamic" fundamentalists and their lovely free states, the great second coming Rev. Sun Young Moon and his vast corporate empire, those wonderful peace-loving right-wing Zionists that run the Israeli government, and all those neat looking TV evangelists who are so far to the right they drink blood from a skull.

All these self-appointed saviours of humanity with a direct red phone line to "God's Kingdom," who conveniently revise and re-shape their philosophies to suit the halls of undemocratic corporate wealth and power and their agenda.

Dear Vicki,

I watched most of your interview with Neil Boyd today (March 7) and feel I need to comment. I don't object to the fact that you had him on the show, but feel that your own questions & comments for him colluded with his many lies & distortions as to what feminism is today, radical or otherwise. Two points stuck in my mind. First, most radical feminists today do not define their identity by Dworkin's notion that all hetero sex is rape (if she even does, as a whole). Boyd is disingenuous to even bring this up as an argument. You did not even challenge this! The other point that you didn't challenge is that many young women today don't verbally identify as feminists, and why this is. The consensus among most thinking feminists (male & female) seems to be that this is probably because most younger women have not yet experienced many inequalities due to their gender. You didn't even bring this up, or question him.

Last week, Bell Sympatico mailed an ad to customers. "It featured a drawing of a female figure from what appeared to be a children's science textbook. The breasts, vulva, ovaries and uterus appeared to have been slashed away with an Exacto blade." If you go to http://tinyurl.com/44osf you can read (at Babble.ca) an article about the actions that Canadians took against this ad, and the apology that Judy Rebick received directly from Bell. I strongly suggest that you invite Ms. Rebick on your show to discuss her recent book "Ten Thousand Roses: The Making of a Feminist Revolution". The roses in the title refer to a single donation to commemorate the women who were murdered in the Montreal Massacre, an event that Boyd & his ilk would like us to stop talking about. For Mr. Boyd to define feminism as "the building block of the new McCarthyism" is bordering on hate speech. I can hardly believe that you appeared to agree with his "theories". Yes, give him a public forum like your show. But please think seriously of what he, and others at www.fathers.ca are really saying, and give some balance to your show. The Fathers Canada 4 Justice group accuses feminists of saying that all violence is male on female. This is an outright lie. Did you call Boyd on the use of the term "Feminazi" on the fathers.ca website. No!

I have loved your interviews since your days in radio, Vicki, but now see that you are uninformed as to the current state of feminism and women's equality worldwide. I hope that you will address this failure.
--------------------------------

I mentioned above that Judy Rebick is going to be on the Vicki Gabereau show soon. I just found out that it will be today on CTV at 2:30 EST.

edited for bad early a.m. spelling

[ 21 March 2005: Message edited by: baba yaga ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hephaestion:

Except when it comes to "chinks", huh? Asshole.

---

What's up with the pack mentality. Y'all are beating the snot out of that guy because..why?

Could it be a result of the word "Conservative" in his handle?

Oh, wait a second...The Cons are the intolerant bigots that attack anyone who does not share thier opnions or beliefs. They exclude those who are different and cast them out.

Thanks and love to all who get it.

Obviously work has yet to be done to help those who don't.

As for "Trolling". As described, it does not go on to say that every poster must completely agree with or "fall in line" with all views and opinions expressed.

It does , however, forbid slanderous, racist/sexist etc. slurs and from my understanding, it does request a minimum of civility and I dare say respect for other members.
(not in those exact words, but implied)

Not the easiest rules to follow at times, but rules nonetheless?

Just a thought. If I misunderstood...please advise.

[ 21 March 2005: Message edited by: Boar_Axe ]

However, for someone to come into a forum designed specifically for the discussion of a certain type of oppression and assert that said oppression does not exist (discussion is, actually, proscribed to "pro-" viewpoints in this forum) is simply looking for a fight. Ie: classic instance of trolling.

I don't mind debating with someone who holds a different view, however I am not inclined to bother with someone who insists on starting from an obviously incorrect and unsupportable position.

[ 21 March 2005: Message edited by: Zoot ]

That said, I am new here and am trying to choose topics carefully because of the high voltage zapping about and agree with you.

I did not see that post as "Anti-". He suggested complete equality with no imbalances. Nice thought but it aint gonna happen in our lifetime (Or mankind's apparenlty). I always listen for ideas and sift them out from rhetoric and hyperbole to consider their value.

I suppose you could read it as saying that there is perfect equality, but you've also just acknowledged it isn't so -- and most people would agree that this is obvious. You could also read his comment as saying that, as there is perfect equality, there is no reason for feminism to exist, which is somewhat taking and "anti-" position. He increased the "anti-" by implying (well, actually stating) that if women are inequal in our culture simply because of the choices we make.

If you will look at some of the scenarios I presented, you will note some of the unequal treatments that women deal with every day. Granted, I presented them in a fairly sarcastic framework, but these are things I have personally experienced. I take great issue at someone telling me that I don't need to be a feminist because it's my own choices that have brought such treatment upon me.

Not that I agree with the idea that women are always oppressed -- quite the contrary, I think that things are slowly moving in the right direction, and that assertive behaviour helps a great deal. However, the unequal treatment happens, whether it is ultimately dealt with in an assertive way or not.

[ 21 March 2005: Message edited by: Zoot ]

As far as "if women are inequal in our culture simply because of the choices we make". I dont see that as a "You are bringing it on yourselves" attitude because I think he failed to articulate his point properly. I feel a sense of empathy here because I too dont always manage to say exactly how I feel in a manner that escapes the scrutiny of the analytical.

I think his point was more that an aggressive or assertive stance by any group would be counter-productive in that fabled utopian society that we both agree does not exist.

I suspect we could agree on that, but regardless..It is ultimatly irrelevant to the topic.

Peace

[ 21 March 2005: Message edited by: Boar_Axe ]

quote:

---

Do away with feminism. Everyone is equal until they make decisions that start their own inequality.

---

He is clearly using the present tense, starting with an admonition to stop feminism -- clearly implying that women, in choosing to be feminist, are CAUSING inequities rather than RESPONDING TO them. I think it's reasonable to respond assertively when faced with aggressive or unfair/unequal treatment, and if it happens repeatedly on the basis of one's sex -- and one is a woman -- your assertive behaviour is, well, feminism. Which, to bring things full circle, is what Debra was trying to get at in her poem. When women stand up for ourselves, it is sometimes met with derision and nasty terms like "feminazi", rather than accepting it as a human response. I suppose if it wasn't exclusively women who were told to stay home, stop striving for careers, stop wanting "it all", being ambitious, being independent, etc, etc, then we wouldn't need feminism. But I've never heard any of these leveled at men -- and now we get, from conservativemark, to stop standing up for ourselves.

I'm not always perfectly clear on what I'm trying to get across, either, but conservativemark doesn't seem so much inarticulate as condescending. He doesn't see the need for women to respond assertively because he denies the experience of roughly half the population. It's unreasonable to expect that to be met with friendliness, especially not in the feminist forum.

[ 22 March 2005: Message edited by: Zoot ]

quote:

---

If one feels that widening the gender gap instead of closing it is counter productive to the cause then I think they have equal right to express that here.

---

That statement presupposes that the aim of feminism is to widen the gender gap -- when actually, the opposite is true.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zoot:

That statement presupposes that the aim of feminism is to widen the gender gap -- when actually, the opposite is true.

In fact, the whole "cause" is to eliminate that gap.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by brebis noire:
Here's a hint: anyone can be an asshole. It's gender and politically neutral.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Radices:

No that statement comments on the actual results of being hypocritical ..has nothing to do with the aim. The distinction between calling someone a feminazi and calling someone an asshole escapes me.

---

Again, you presuppose hypocrisy. I see nothing hypocritical in calling people on inappropriate, unfair or unequal behaviour -- this is at the heart of feminism, especially when such behaviour is applied to women for the simple fact that they are female. I'm not saying that some women aren't assholes about it (brebis noire said it well), but that still doesn't make the term "feminazis" okay. And it really isn't okay when you get that term slung at you when you aren't being an asshole. Or does "asshole", by your definition, simply mean "one who doesn't immediately and unquestioningly submit to male authority"?

[ 22 March 2005: Message edited by: Zoot ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zoot:

Again, you presuppose hypocrisy. I see nothing hypocritical in calling people on inappropriate, unfair or unequal behaviour -- this is at the heart of feminism, especially when such behaviour is applied to women for the simple fact that they are female. I'm not saying that some women aren't assholes about it (brebis noire said it well), but that still doesn't make the term "feminazis" okay. And it really isn't okay when you get that term slung at you when you aren't being an asshole. Or does "asshole", by your definition, simply mean "one who doesn't immediately and unquestioningly submit to male authority"?

[ 22 March 2005: Message edited by: Zoot ]

---

Double *SIGH*

quote:

---

Originally posted by brebis noire:
OK, so your point is about personal insults.
Can I ask you why you're making it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Radices:
Conservative guy was first told to get human then that he was an asshole. Good on you guys ..I'm sure you've won over another supporter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pogge:

Oforheavensakes. Conservativemark was called an asshole because he'd been trolling in another thread including writing blatantly racist remarks.

---

Please link the remarks. just so I know.

I am new here and I need to identify what a TROLL is.

[ 22 March 2005: Message edited by: Boar_Axe ]

[ 22 March 2005: Message edited by: Boar_Axe ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boar_Axe:
Please link the remarks. just so I know.

---

Do you think I'd make something like that up? Find a post of his in this thread and click on the profile icon. It's the one right beside the date - looks like a file card with a little person beside it. On the screen that comes up look for a link to recent posts and you'll see which threads he's been posting in.

quote:

---

I am new here and I need to identify what a TROLL is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by pogge:

Short version: a troll is someone who is purposely provocative.

---

I did that. (thnx for the obvious)

Anyway, conservativemark's comment in this thread was also trolling, in my opinion. We are all entitled to our opinions, are we not? If you go into a pro-feminist forum and tell people to do away with feminism, you are either incredibly stupid if you expect them to react positively, or a troll who expects them to react negatively. The latter makes more sense to me.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boar_Axe:
It appears to me that you just chose to assualt him because you have elected yourself to the position of god.

---

Good lord.

BTW, arborman, that rant wasn't particularly aimed at you. It's aimed at the people in this thread who keep frigging well debating whether or not it was okay for Debra to use the term in her poem rather than discussing the content of the poem itself. Like, yeah, we get the idea. Nobody likes Nazis. Nazis are a bad thing. Very bad thing. Bad bad bad. BAD.

[ 23 March 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

...feminista...

---

"Whatever happens... I must not... cry... in front of my feminista..."

[ 23 March 2005: Message edited by: scooter ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
I don't think Debra proudly labels herself a "feminazi" as a way of reclaiming the word. The poem is quite obviously sarcastic. I somehow really doubt that Debra is calling for all feminists to stand up proudly and declare that they're feminazis.

Good lord.

BTW, arborman, that rant wasn't particularly aimed at you. It's aimed at the people in this thread who keep frigging well debating whether or not it was okay for Debra to use the term in her poem rather than discussing the content of the poem itself. Like, yeah, we get the idea. Nobody likes Nazis. Nazis are a bad thing. Very bad thing. Bad bad bad. BAD.

[ 23 March 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

---

It bears repeating:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
I don't think Debra proudly labels herself a "feminazi" as a way of reclaiming the word. The poem is quite obviously sarcastic. I somehow really doubt that Debra is calling for all feminists to stand up proudly and declare that they're feminazis.

Good lord.

BTW, arborman, that rant wasn't particularly aimed at you. It's aimed at the people in this thread who keep frigging well debating whether or not it was okay for Debra to use the term in her poem rather than discussing the content of the poem itself. Like, yeah, we get the idea. Nobody likes Nazis. Nazis are a bad thing. Very bad thing. Bad bad bad. BAD.

[ 23 March 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:
I don't think Debra proudly labels herself a "feminazi" as a way of reclaiming the word. The poem is quite obviously sarcastic. I somehow really doubt that Debra is calling for all feminists to stand up proudly and declare that they're feminazis.

Good lord.

BTW, arborman, that rant wasn't particularly aimed at you. It's aimed at the people in this thread who keep frigging well debating whether or not it was okay for Debra to use the term in her poem rather than discussing the content of the poem itself. Like, yeah, we get the idea. Nobody likes Nazis. Nazis are a bad thing. Very bad thing. Bad bad bad. BAD.

[ 23 March 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

---

Oh, don't get me wrong. I know it wasn't aimed at me - in fact I skimmed over much of the thread when it started getting into the should she or shouldn't she part, so I might not have read the rant (apologies if I should have)

I just responded to the original post, and the general theme of the thread, which focused on the definitely provocative word in the title.

That's why I said it's not really up to me. I thought the point of the poem was great.

I actually think the overuse of the term 'nazi' as a way of demonizing a group is badly diluting the term. NOTE-I am not referring to Debra, who is not demonizing a group, I am referring to the people who use terms like feminazi, or ecofascist.

My experience over towards the other end of the gender continuum is that lunkhead males often refer to themselves as 'misogynists' or 'chauvinists' while saying offensive things about women or how they think they should behave. They are trying to claim the words as well, to 'affirm' their behaviour. Arborwoman tells me that a male using the term 'misogynist' is usually a good indication he is one (she made an exception for me when she found out that I actually know what it means, and was using it appropriately).

As a male, I won't ever use the term feminazi, because I don't think there is any way I could use it without causing offense - there just isn't that much irony available. It's an offensive term, to women and others who've experienced real Nazism.

As women, however, your language is your own, and it's not up to me to say what is appropriate for you to say.

I will happily use the term feminista, because arborwoman calls herself one, and I'd like to think I'm an associate member or something (feminista booster club).

You've all gotta laugh at yourselves sometime soon.