(December 3, 2015 at 4:01 pm)DespondentFishdeathMasochismo Wrote:

(December 3, 2015 at 3:59 pm)Losty Wrote: I've already known this whole time. This thread has like 76 pages and I knew the answer before I ever clicked the title the first time. Many atheists are anti feminists for the same reason many atheists are anti Muslim. They cast a blanket of judgment over a group of of millions (or even billions in the case of Muslims) of people based on the actions and behaviors of the extremist minority.

Anita Sarkeesian speaks at ted talks and at the united nations. She's a fucked up piece of shit, she has a major voice and she calls herself a feminist. I see that as pretty fucking bad.

She's just 1 person. I can't control what she does and I'd rather not be judged based on her actions. But I'm not afraid to stand up for what I believe. I've pissed off more than one sexist person on this forum when I called them out on their misandry.

alright

The relevance being I am not alone in this sentiment. Most feminists are against misandry.

(January 1, 2015 at 11:47 pm)ketameankitty Wrote: YouTube can, and has, done wonders for the atheist community.  It gave free thinkers a place to post videos to help educate the world on the likes of science and dangers of religion.  It was YouTubers like CultOfDusty, who I originally subscribed to for his political videos, that helped me come to my senses and denounce my former religion.

But over the past year or so, there's been a trend among popular atheist YouTubers: anti-feminism.

I will admit right now that there are many extreme feminists who I don't agree with.  In fact, a lot of the things "anti-feminists" critique, I agree with.  But not to the extent that I would ever title myself as an anti-feminist.  No, I am not against the movement that fights the Republicans' attempts to limit my reproductive rights, or the movement that points out double standards that still exist (for women and men).  I am not against the movement that is working to make gender identification and sexuality and orientation normal things.  Why any forward-thinking, self-identifying atheist would be against this movement is beyond me.

I understand these anti-feminists usually support the efforts of feminists in the past, and even the present.  After all, TheAmazingAtheist paints his fingernails...if it wasn't for modern feminism, that would be unacceptable.  I know that these anti-feminists just get their panties in a knot when they watch videos by extremists like Anita Sarkeesian, you know, that woman that no one likes, save for her following of maybe...40,000 people?  Maybe?  If that?

Point being, all these extreme feminists are a joke.  They don't have power in politics.  They have a minimal influence over culture and the population.  The only people they're reaching are misandrous cat ladies who would be just as misandrous and just as cat lady with or without a weekly subscription to FemFreq.

But regardless, we all have our opinions and things we're passionate about.  I can understand why people, including atheist YouTubers, would want to respond to some of the ridiculous things the extreme feminists spew.  But like...why respond to that meaningless bullshit every week?  If these extreme feminists are gaining any momentum at all, it's because the anti-feminists are guiding them to their videos!

Tj, TheAmazingAtheist, arguably has the largest following of his peers.  That said, he has some considerable power over people, and probably much more so than the big, mean, scary Anita Sarkeesian!  Why is he, and so many other YouTubers, wasting that power on beating a dead horse again on a weekly basis?

I get it.  It's the Internet and people can do what they want.  If making videos mocking these feminists is fun for them, they can do it!  But should they?

As an anti-religion atheist, I don't think so.

If atheists want to gain acceptance, see religious laws get removed, and someday live in a world where dogma doesn't exist, we need power.  And power comes in number.

Feminists (not the extremists) are a heftily sized group of people that atheists should be working to attract, not piss off.  A lot of feminists are areligious because they know that many gender roles and oppression stem from the Bible and Qu'ran and other pieces of religious paraphernalia.  I formerly identified more as a feminist until I "went back to being" an atheist.  I see religion as the root of several problems in the world, including the problems feminists fight.  While I am still a feminist, I tend to talk and get more passionate about the atheists' cause because I think it more or less encompasses all of my beliefs, so to speak.  What I'm trying to say is, there are a lot of women out there, who call themselves feminist, that we as atheists should try to "convert".

When even female atheist YouTubers like JaclynGlenn label themselves "anti-feminist", it deters a lot of queer people, trans people, and women in general.  How are these people supposed to feel welcome in the atheist community when it's largely composed of men and some women--men and women who say they are against feminism?!

I unsubscribed from TheAmazingAtheist and seldom tune in to JaclynGlenn because I got tired of seeing their anti-feminist videos so often.  And they're not the only ones.

Maybe I'm just being the kind of overly-sensitive bitch that Tj and Jaclyn rant and rave about, but I just honestly think their efforts could be put to better use making more videos criticizing the religious bigots in politics and media instead of a handful of ladies crying about cat calls.

I know this post will probably go unread or unanswered both because I'm new, and because I hold a very unpopular opinion.  I just have been wanting to get this off my chest for a long time, and I didn't really have a place for it until now.  But I'd love to further discus!

I suppose you would be one to think "anti-feminist" means "anti-woman". If so, that position is simply not true!

You can blame the feminists for their own decline with all their anti-science doctrines, mudslinging tactics against anyone who challenges their doctrines, and the low-down, dirty lies they tell in their attempts at unseating anyone in a position which they envy. Also there's a highly selective definition on "equality" which they operate by. To be specific, Rebecca Watson and her lapdog PZ Meyers really need it explained to them how "some people are more equal than others" does not in fact define "equality"! I had to get away from Patheos on account of so many feminists there in the "Atheism" section who understood absolutely nothing about the rational discourse and objective fair-mindedness which makes one an atheist, and in turn makes one more sympathetic regarding women's issues and LGBT groups.

If you believe you have the right to play on a level playing field, then you need to keep it no less level on your own end.

If women, when they decided the world was unfair to them (I'm not arguing that it was) really cared about making it a fair place for all to compete in, then they never would have called themselves "feminists". This word, when invoked for it's actual meaning, brings the most ridiculous denials that it isn't really what it sounds like because they can tweak our language anyway they wish to (because feminists rule the world, bwahahahaaaaa). 

Those women who have any good sense of fair play and intellectual honesty will need to re-brand their ideas on equality in a way that won't encourage the assholes who are just looking for an issue to hide behind while they kick and claw their way to the top with no regard for playing by their own rules, believing themselves exempt. You may want to give "egalitarian" a try.

I think you may have really had the SJWs (Social Justice Warrors) in mind. I'm all for fighting for social justice, but this sort of extreme axe-grinding, ubercensorious nonsense really is a joke, and then it isn't the problem facing any atheist movements today. The major bustup is at the top with Watson, who believes she is above playing by her own rules, lying and defaming a major influence who inspired many who discovered their own atheism as a result of his work. That dude is also likely the literate female's best friend ever, but unfortunately people like Watson spend much less time actually reading than they do trashing the works of others. If you don't know what I'm talking about, then how long have you been living on this earth?

That's so true mr hanky. If feminist is rights for everyone, why is it called feminism? I hold that belief as well.

(January 2, 2015 at 12:21 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If you are for equal rights and equality, you're a feminist. That's all it really takes to be one. There are extremist in all stances.

That's only true according to Rebecca Watson and PZ Meyer's Newspeak dictionary. You can be all for equal rights and equality under the Egalitarian flag, while being much less offensive.

(December 3, 2015 at 4:28 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote:

(January 2, 2015 at 12:21 am)MysticKnight Wrote: If you are for equal rights and equality, you're a feminist. That's all it really takes to be one. There are extremist in all stances.

That's only true according to Rebecca Watson and PZ Meyer's Newspeak dictionary. You can be all for equal rights and equality under the Egalitarian flag, while being much less offensive.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism
"Full Definition of FEMINISM

1
: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2
: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"
Newspeak indeed. :eyeroll:

(December 3, 2015 at 7:25 pm)Pizza Wrote:

(December 3, 2015 at 4:28 pm)God of Mr. Hanky Wrote: That's only true according to Rebecca Watson and PZ Meyer's Newspeak dictionary. You can be all for equal rights and equality under the Egalitarian flag, while being much less offensive.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism
"Full Definition of FEMINISM

1
:  the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2
:  organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests"

So you believe one can mash up any word out of pre-existing linguistic components, and define the contraction any way they wish to? I call poo!

"Femi"=female
"ist" means exactly the same as it does in the word "sexist", otherwise it has a serious and irredeemable issue with consistency.

Regardless of the above, why is this mashup exclusively "femi"?

Yes, Virginia, they really do the same with dictionaries as they do with the history books!

(December 3, 2015 at 4:27 pm)DespondentFishdeathMasochismo Wrote: That's so true mr hanky. If feminist is rights for everyone, why is it called feminism? I hold that belief as well.

Check a dictionary. Feminism is called feminism because it's pro-rights-for-females. That doesn't mean that it is anti-rights for anyone else.

And it is for anyone: For anyone who gives a fuck about the rights of women. Regardless of whether they themselves are women.

(December 3, 2015 at 7:38 pm)Evie Wrote:

(December 3, 2015 at 4:27 pm)DespondentFishdeathMasochismo Wrote: That's so true mr hanky. If feminist is rights for everyone, why is it called feminism? I hold that belief as well.

Check a dictionary. Feminism is called feminism because it's pro-rights-for-females. That doesn't mean that it is anti-rights for anyone else.

And it is for anyone: For anyone who gives a fuck about the rights of women. Regardless of whether they themselves are women.

Feminism claims to be a rights movement for everyone. Self proclaimed feminists have literally told me this before. That's what I've heard feminists say. It's annoying because there's no tenets of feminism, I don't even know why everyone seems to have their own definition of it.