Videos of feminist protests at Toronto University have apparently put on display some prime examples of a serious pest problem within the feminist community: an infestation of extremists who, according to other feminists, don't represent the movement.
We hear it after every action they take. As MRAs discuss the violence and vitriol, the attacks on free speech, the irrational statements and spewing of venom, feminist apologists trickle into these discussions to offer the same sorry, tired, worn-out old argument:
Really?
If not all feminists are like that, what are
the other feminists like... and where the hell are they? Because all of the overt, effective action we've seen has involved feminists who are
exactly like that.
We've seen feminists lobby for
discriminatory law and policy.
We've seen
how some of those laws and policies are abused, often
up close and personally.
We've seen feminists advocate for
discriminatory social standards.
We've seen feminists attack the
due process rights of men.
We've seen feminists
attack men's speech rights... and
consistently, at that.
We've seen
feminist violence, even
attempted murder.
We've seen feminists
attack and condemn discussion on ways to prevent boys from falling behind in education, and other men's issues.
We've seen feminists oppose the success of civil rights efforts
unless they're allowed a free ride on another movement's coat tails, even at the
understood risk of derailing the entire effort.
We've seen feminists fight to
deny assistance to abused men.
We've seen that fight extend into an
overt effort to deny facts and hide existing factors related to abused men.
We've seen feminists propagate a culture of tolerance for female sexual violence against men
by denying its existence, denying its severity, and when all else fails, denying its significance in relation to its gender counterpart.
We've seen feminists
actively, deliberately vilify the entire male gender, treating the dysfunctional behavior of some
as if it were a gender characteristic.
We've even seen them use the
slander of innocent men in their campaigns.
The one time feminists point to as an effort to promote equality, they didn't advocate to remove a discriminatory factor from impacting men, but instead moved to become equally abused: When presented with the opportunity to advocate for the abolition of the United States Selective Service's outdated and unnecessary mandate that men make themselves available to be drafted into the military, feminists instead fought to be included in it. It was
more important to them to be
included than it was for them to right a wrong. I have often seen this effort presented as an argument that
see, feminists care about men's rights, too. In reality, it's an example of the solipsistic nature of feminism.
Rather than realize how important it is to end this one remaining vestige of overt slavery in the U.S., their main concern was their own exclusion from it. This was not an effort at elevating the treatment of men, but instead an effort at removing an area where the discrimination was obvious.
On a side note:
I bet most feminists who have argued for "joining" the "draft" haven't gone to the level of effort that this one did. I don't think MRAs should take
any feminist assertions on women in the military seriously until feminists do this en masse. If they really, honestly are for this, then they should be expected to back it up with action. If they won't do that, then we're justified in assuming that their advocacy on this is completely hollow and meaningless.
Back to our regularly scheduled topic: As stated, we have seen various feminist group attacks on men, men's rights, masculinity, and the public's perspective thereof. We
haven't seen feminists put any effort into curbing the rampant and blatant extremism in their movement.
Think about what feminists do when they have a cause to promote or a factor to oppose. They don't sit around and simply deny association with it.
They
act.
They march en masse, in protest, with shouted slogans and carried signs.
Social media campaigns spread outward from the central effort like ripples in water disturbed by a dropped rock.
Their various activist groups organize media contact efforts to promote their position.
They execute email, phone call, and letter-writing campaigns to government officials.
Public influence efforts include blogging, vlogging, and extensive discussion in the comments under each.
If the issue is with an entity, such as a business,
university, or other organization, there are social pressure campaigns
targeting the entity, as well, using anything from stern criticism to
threats of boycott and public shaming.
If legal action is an option, it is taken, as well.
So, if "nice" feminists are the mainstream... if "nice" feminists represent the majority opinion, the majority effort, and the majority of activists within the movement... why haven't we seen any action from the "nice" front?
Why has not one feminist from anywhere shown up to these events to stand up against this "extremist" position?
Why have none of the Feminists who are Not Like That raised a counter-protest against those embarrassments to their movement?
Why have none of the Feminists who Support Men's Rights shown up to escort men through these pickets, protect the human rights posters, shout down the vitriol, and assert their place as
the mainstream of feminism?
Where are the feminist-written blogs condemning the acts of harassment, violence, and vandalism that these "extremists" have committed?
Where are the popular, widely viewed "mainstream feminist" blog and vlog posts arguing the right of men to address and discuss men's issues among themselves, and on their own terms?
Where is even the slightest
public "mainstream feminist" criticism of this type of behavior?
Have
any feminist groups created information campaigns to help correct this imbalance in their movement?
Where are the "Real feminists don't abuse men" graphics?
Where are the "Real feminists don't deny issues" messages?
Where are the "Feminists can stop male-bashing" campaigns?
Where are the anti-harassment posters with messages like "Hatred is not a feminist value?"
Where is the "mainstream feminist" statement to any major media outlet, condemning the choice of "extremists" to treat the MRM as an enemy force instead of a cooperative effort toward the achievement of social and legal equality?
In fact... where
is the mainstream feminist end of that cooperative effort? Is denying association with the part of the feminist movement which effects change all these apologists are good for, or are they going to put their money where their keyboards are, and stand up to those they not-so-openly condemn?
We've seen feminist groups take dramatic action in response to causes they support, or issues they oppose. If "nice" feminists are doing
nothing in response to "extremism" within their movement but denying association with it, that doesn't signify opposition. It doesn't even signify separation from it. It signifies tolerance, and acceptance. The lack of action is still a choice - the act of subtly condoning the behavior.
Dissociation of the self from that behavior is not a
meaningful argument. It's not
enthusiastic dissent. It's a way of letting someone else do the dirty work, so that one may reap the benefits when that work is successful, but have plausible deniability when the hateful nature of it is noticed by others. Denial of association doesn't make up for the continued tolerance by self-titled "mainstream" feminists for these displays of hatred, bigotry, vitriol, and abusive attitudes. It doesn't erase the willingness to continue using these so-called "extremists" as a means of attempting to silence or suppress resistance to the human rights abuses advocated for by feminist groups.
It only shows one's willingness to be unabashedly dishonest about it.
Relevant:
“Nice” feminists: grassroots of a hate movement
