So did Atheism + bite the dust?

[Dystopia]

Now, sure... it could 'just as easily be a troll', but... Poe's Law... this happens enough that 'feminazi' is a thing. Hell, just listening to people at conferences talking about feminism tends to include some absolutely disgustingly sexist misconceptions about men (schrodinger's rapist for instance, also stuff like 'straight white men's lives revolve around sex'), and the term 'privilege' is almost exclusively levied at cisgendered white men (despite the fact that damn near everyone has privileges of some sort, even if they're not the same ones: there are cards that people can play, and most of us have a damn good chance of winning, regardless of the minor benefits of being a guy or a girl)

- Schrodinger's rapist isn't what you think it means. It doesn't mean all men are potential rapists - Only about 5-6% men will rape during their lives. Schrodinger's rapist tells us that upon meeting an unknown man a woman has zero way of knowing if he is a rapist or not, therefore he is a potential rapist until she knows more about him - And since the damage of rape is higher than trusting a good man (it depends) women should be careful. This is not offensive to me - If I was a woman, I'd think exactly the same - And mind you - Rapists are from all backgrounds so you can't identify one simply by the look or clothes. Schrodinger's rapist tells us that "this is wrong and it needs to be changed" - It is a critique to how rape is more frequent than people may think (and how it can happen to any kind of girl not just attractive ones) and that needs to be changed trough educating people.

- As a white cis male, yeah our lives revolve a lot around sex at least until we hit 40. That is not a myth (but it revolves around other things) - But it is a problem because we give too much importance to sex as men, at least more than we should

- If you think white men still don't have it easier you need to revise your standards. I wouldn't switch being a white man with anyone because I know my life has been easier and I like easy mode (unless it's for stealth games)

Between the vehemently aggressive classifying of peoples, vitriolic and sometimes violent persecution of people who do not belong within the 'in' group, the utterly insane reaction to any instance of perceived slut-shaming, the immediate backlash to unpopular views or statements that are identified as attacks before they're half formed, the lack of moderation within the feminist communities allowing 'rabid' and 'toxic' people to continue behaving in this manner under their banner, and the violently threatening manner in which these people conduct a great deal of 'discourse' (rant-inclined)...?

I'm gonna need more explanation. It's impossible to control everyone who gets in the movement and there are branches of feminism, some more aggressive others more passive - There's no way to foresee what will happen

Feminazi' is here to stay in its modern sense, and for damn good reason. When feminists finally *coughs*'man up' ( Wink ) and cleanse their movement of these poisonous personalities? That's when feminism will regain respect in an online sense...

Of course, I believe it's far far too late to recover the movement's 'branding'. It'd be a waste of effort at this point, much much easier to 'start' a movement about the equality of all persons (in a social sense).

I'm curious - Why do you think a whole movement fixes everything? This is unreasonable - Cancer groups exist.. Well, for cancer, not for auto immune diseases. My government has around 30 ministries because the government itself cannot handle anything (the prime minister), specialization is need. A movement called egalitarianism would have to divide itself between many branches to hit all people's problems, and that would lead us to the division we have today.

True, this is. But it's also true that there are some very serious issues in the way of equal status among the sexes everywhere (middle east is going to need a lot of help in this department, and there are definitely other significant problems elsewhere).

Still, I don't think that rebranding would hurt those efforts at all. Thinking Infact, the racial equalities included should be better for an overall effort.

Sure would be nice to get things more balanced here at 'home', though.

Your proposal is not bad, but it needs further explanation. I don't see why individuals can't specialize. Some feminists are LGBT as well, black feminists are probably black activists, etc.

We're close enough to 'there' already... I can see support groups remaining useful within a greater whole, but there's far too much us vs them when you have small groups... LGB vs T, for instance. In the example provided... T had to advocate itself into LGB to get anywhere. There is a great deal of power in consolidation, and consolidation certainly does not mean that the agendas of each involved group cannot be met outside of said consolidation.

On this I agree but I think people dwell too much on the "my problems are bigger" and that's wrong. A group should address some issues and refrain from minimizing other group's issues.

Central support for human rights has powers that aren't being effectively tapped into at this moment in time. Subgroups should be able to pitch their wants to the human rights group, which would have considerably more weight to throw around without the associated negative political baggage of any of its constituent groups.

Many people dislike the UN. Human rights groups are not enough since HR are a worldwide conception to be applied everywhere and every nation should enable measures to fulfil those rights - With specializations. The same way we don't have One law ruling over all, we have over 1000+ laws regulating different aspects of social life

I don't see why they shouldn't be either... all I can say is that it's quite evident that not all of them are (and I daresay that not even 'many' of them are... if most feminists are egalitarian: they do a shite job of showing it when they support the man-hating portions of their group), and therefore it shouldn't simply be assumed of feminists that they are egalitarians. Egalitarians being feminists, on the other hand, is by even the simplest of definitions necessary.

I disagree with you on that but we've probably had different experiences. In my country feminism is seen as being empowering and an answer to sexist conducts (that still happen, a good example is firing pregnant women and prohibiting women from getting pregnant after getting the job), I don't see a lot of problems with it. America has it's fair share of nutjobs but America is a bad example (sorry) for the rest of the world, in feminism and any other issue.

My dictionary only mentions advocacy, which is synonymical with support or backing.

'Activism' and 'advocacy' aren't one and the same... I'm certainly not supporting the notion that every person who supports a womens' rights agenda as being a feminazi...

But many 'advocates' are quiet... whereas activists are anything but. Far too many people take a back seat to support... and this lets other people put words in their mouths and become their spokespersons.

... Feminazis are amongst feminist spokespersons right now.

People who remain quiet like me dislike social networks because they are annoying. they make me sick and are full of retarded boring monotonous people everywhere. In my dictionary it says primarily support and belief in gender quality (which extends to men and trans* folks by definition) - Culturally and historically it has always been that, but even in the 70s, 60s, 50s and 1920s there were women who hated men and their voices were felt at the moment. Do you know that back in the day people were having the same reaction to feminism we are having right now (by calling them radicals)? It's curious don't you think?

Alice, I identify primarily as an egalitarian - But in this context I think it's cool to dislike or hate feminism because of Rebecca Watson and so on; and I don't line up with the cool crowd (I like being controversial) - I've also witnessed scenes of violence and sexism against women (yesterday I saw domestic violence in public street) and it's too disturbing for me to say that women already have it equal. I also like my feminine side so, I don't have much to lose. If it wasn't for feminism, men wouldn't be have it easier displaying feminine traits (still frowned upon, but a little more acceptable)