I've no doubt that I'll be less than welcome here since I'm a self-declared feminist... but thought that I have nothing to lose by requesting more information on anti-feminism from the forum regulars. The worst that can happen is that I learn nothing of note (i.e. if you all tell me to bog off), and I don't get any further insight into what you have to say, which would be a great shame in my opinion (and an unfortunate waste of server space too). Especially after I went to the hassle of registering :lol:

I'm genuinely interested to hear more of what you have to say, so think of me as wading in here holding the proverbial white hankie on a stick.

So:

Karl states repeatedly that his site/this forum is not anti-woman. It's anti-feminist. This is even in the forum FAQ section, much to my surprise. Not knowing him (or any of you) in real life, I can only assume the assertion of non-woman-hating is an honest one; anyway, I don't think it would make for a very happy husband-wife/father-daughter/mother-son household should that be true, eh? It's too easy to vilify the opposing side to your own beliefs i.e. should I state "pah! you antifeminists just all hate women" vs. you stating "pah! you feminists just all hate men!"... get the picture?

Since you're selective of those women you hate - that is, the feminist ones - and have what I assume to be healthy relationships with women in general, that suggests there are issues about feminism that I should at least be made aware of. It would be easier to ignore sites like this, but I don't believe I'd be doing my own belief systems justice by blanking them and not investigating criticisms.

The questions I would be interested to hear answered would be related to the nature of your "hate" (if that's what we can call it).




Question Area One
The Wikipedia article states that there are 2 types of anti-feminist: #1 believes that feminism "is a destructive force to society and family life" and #2 believes that feminism is "now pushing for more than equality". Which do YOU believe?

Taking #1 into account -- those of you who believe feminism is a destructive force to family life (etc), what is your ideal definition of "family life"? If you were made Lord And Master Of All The Universe, what would that "normal family" look like? Taking an extreme example, is that ideal something similar to the 1950s nuclear family - with Pa doing his 40hrs a week, Ma having tea on the table, and Bob and Sue attending a normal high school (the former on the track team, the latter trying out for a cheerleading place)? (Sorry for the mega cheesy image perhaps but it's one example.) Or is that ideal family something more similar to today's family, for example where both adults may work, but without the favours today's modern woman commands? (Such as the increasingly favourable maternity packages, etc.)

Taking #2 into account, if you believe that feminism HAS achieved equality... when did this happen? What are the rights women have gained that are over and above acceptability? I'm thinking family courts/high profile divorce cases... etc.. here. If you believe feminism's beginnings were noble (such as women non-landowners wanting the right to vote), where did it go wrong?

Or maybe your problem with feminism is a mix of #1 and #2? If so, please share

Question Area Two
... which leads to, Are there any aims of feminism with which you agree?

For example (God forbid) if any of the females in your life were ever hurt in a gender-specific way (such as being attacked walking home one night), and then you found out that the police treatment of her case was handled in a non-acceptable manner i.e. counselling was not offered, the only attending male police officer seemed to have a laissez faire attitude... would you give ground on the idea that, as with all things, feminism can do good (improve victim support) as well as bad (make it easier for false accusations to be more leniently dealt with)... or would that be a non-feminist issue for you? I.e. they are separate things - mishandling by a police authority in such a case has no bearing on your opinion of feminism.

Question Area Three
If you believe feminism to be an evil influence (whatever your reasoning above), do you believe its followers are naturally evil people, hell-bent on destroying men purely for vindictive sakes (and doing so knowingly)... or are they simply misguided? Both? Other?

Question Area Four
Are you happy with the level of provision the men's movement gives to men? (I'm talking UK-specific here, I have little knowledge outside of the British Isles.)

Whilst the anti-feminist men's movement seems happy to attack feminism's flaws (of which there are many), sometimes it feels like the Conservatives attacking Labour policy, and vice versa... without coming up with any solutions themselves. Thoughts on this?

Forgive me for being presumptuous, but the men's movement (to me at least) seems to draw parallels to radical feminism in that they're both extreme. I myself would be less than welcome on a radfem forum because of the views I hold.

Is there a void to be filled by a sort of "individualist men's movement" or a "liberal men's movement"... one less focused on hatred of the other side, one which can offer its own ideas maybe? Do you think this will ever materialise? If it will, where will its influence come from... America perhaps?






I realise that not everyone is a clone of each other on here, so I may get a smattering of differing opinions to be above, but I'd be interested in hearing anything any of you have to say (albeit politely, guys, at least give me that courtesy) on these matters.

And, any questions for me, just shout and I'll do my best to answer!

* Ooops, I see this post has become rather long. Apologies!

Hi af,

Judging by the IP addresses, I'm assuming you are the "A Feminist" that emailed me yesterday? Either way, welcome to the board.

I'm taking my time responding, as in short, I'm very busy atm, and it may take me a while to answer. I'm talking minutes & hours, not days & weeks.

Anyhow, I'm really grateful that you even read the FAQ and such, it makes a refreshing change for someone to do so - gender regardless

I'll be responding shortly, just not right this very moment as I'm still cleaning up the house (see, we fella's can do it despite the stereotypes).

Yes, that's the one! I didn't know if to bother joining on here, in case I simply get a load of abuse... I didn't plan on joining when I emailed you, I wouldn't have bothered doing the two at one time, you see.

NP about response time, I'm making tea for my husband as it is right now anyway (being the good wife lol).

As for reading the FAQ, I truly believe that if someone criticises what I believe in, I have a duty to engage with that, no? Believe it or not I spent my Sunday afternoon and most of today reading through your site and its links*. Because that's the only way our opinions change and evolve, which mine have done over time, over lots of things. I've mellowed on certain things, become more vocal on others... it just depends. I wouldn't like to think I'm the type of person who forms an opinion and then sticks fingers in her ears to anyone with a differing opinion.... I know some people like that - and they're usually neither very interesting or well-informed

* Do you know your main site (the purple one with the menu bars) looks awfully strange in Firefox? (Win XP SP2, FF 1.5)

I'm using Firefox 1.5.03 and it looks "ok" to me... as it should, to the best of my knowledge. However, according to my logs, you're viewing it at 1280x1024 resolution, which it was not designed for.
The site was designed to suite MY laptop LOL, which is 1024x768x16m. Viewing it @ this resolution, it looks normal. I could easily adapt a new template to account for higher resolutions, but sadly my laptop's screen resolution only goes up to 1024x768, hence I could never actually see it unless i began stealing my wife's laptop frequently... which wouldn't be in my interests...


The above image (click to see full size) shows the appearance under 1024x768 resolution.

Ah, fair do's

You're quite welcome here, as long as personal boundaries are not broken and respect is a two-way street. Oh, and make us all a nice cuppa. White hankies are always welcome, especially during the winter months.

You've hit on a point I've asked many feminists to consider; that their 'truths' are equally ingrained as my 'truths', just because this is how it is. I'm not a worse person for being anti-feminist than they are for being feminist, but to get this across to some is a mission impossible scenario. With regards the 'anti-women/anti-feminist' situation, I've put that up because one of my outlaw relatives has abused her position in my life frequently, or had. I believe (note: this is my opinion only - not scientific fact) it comes down to her being a matriarch and authoritarian; she is not used to seeing a man having equal voice in a relationship and so tried to instil matriarchy within our marriage for her benefit, and my wife's. One of her frequent methods of silencing me was to express the site as being anti-woman, a shaming tactic to gain the upper-hand. It worked for a while, granted, but soon I realised this argument was being used over the most trivial of disagreements - and often entirely unrelated. But if she thought it would silence me long enough for her argument to 'win', then it would be thrown in. I noticed similar with some feminists, they would accuse the site of being anti-woman. Yet as I've stated in the pertaining thread, no one has yet managed to actually find a page that is specifically 'anti-woman'. Even my wife spent a good hour going through the site with the dedicated task of locating anti-woman material. Trust me, as others can vouch, my wife is nowhere close to antifeminist. And when we argue, if she had found material - she would have no qualms in bringing it to my attention. On the ivillage feminism board, I called a feminist on her claim and asked her to put her money where her mouth was by highlighting the misogyny she claimed to see. Two days later she replied saying that a photograph (of a feminist) my site had offended her so much, she couldn't bear to view any more pages, and hence my request (for proof) was denied.
This has been the case time after time, whenever an accusation is made, I ask for proof, they decline to supply any. The only exceptions have been on two separate occasions a quote from two forum members have been offered as 'proof' that this site/forum is anti-woman.

For me, it's both #1 & #2.
In short, feminism has openly declared war on families. They specified they want men (not boys necessarily) removed from family situations. By the enactment of legal loopholes that largely benefit women, feminism has almost acquired this situation. All a woman, any woman, need do is exaggerate an argument - and the man is barred from going near her as well as their children. She can run away for a week or two to a hostel, make up a story (which even when unbelievable - still gets accepted) for the sole purpose of hooking up with a new man, knowing that the children's father is barred from knowing where his own children are... Only recently have two (yes, count them - two) homes for men opened up to offer similar services. As i understand it, these homes are not sponsored by government in any manner, whereas the 400+ women's homes are given endless amounts of cash to support & sponsor the "legally enabled kidnapping of children". "Equality", as an individual word, suggests that it should benefit both men & women at equal proportion, or at the very least, to the degree required. However, feminism has not done anything positive for men. Not a bean. It has, however, done a lot of work to hurt men, the above (kidnapping children, dissolving family to their definition) being just the tip of the ice-berg. Feminists have openly (in radio/TV/magazine interviews, etc) laughed at men who have been sexually assaulted - would they laugh at a woman being kicked in the groin or a woman's breast lopped off in hateful revenge for suspected infidelity? Damn right they wouldn't. I have yet to see the average-feminist fighting for a man's right to have equal parenting time as well as responsibilities. I have, however, read of NOW members attending family court sessions to intimidate judges into handing over custody to the mother. I've not yet found a feminist who has spoken out against female violence upon men, child abuse by mothers or elder abuse by daughters. The list of inequalities goes on...and on...and on. Rather like the Ariston adverts...and on..and Ariston...and on...and on...and Ariston...
I believe it went wrong because radical man-haters, not true egalitarians, took control of the movement - as described by Erin Pizzey, whose name I'm sure you're well versed with.


(My fingers are burning up from overwork - I’ll respond to others shortly)

seperately, I'm moving this from 'general chit chat' to 'feminist flipside', not to minimize interaction (as i'll be leaving a shadow in chit-chat), but rather because it is more appropriate, and hence not to be taken personally.

All good points af and BTW welcome to the board.

Since it's 1.30 am here and I just dropped in I couldn't do justice to all the pertinent points you present. They are worthy of response.

BUT if you seriously want to debate, (I hope I'm speaking for most members) we would have to look beyond matters 'as they are now'. Most of us believe that we live in times that have been subject to a long programme of social manipulation that makes the Russian Revolution look like a kid's tea party. There are some 'givens' or assumed norms that are not what they appear to be.

Sorry if this sounds cryptic. I'll get back when the sun rises.

Thanks for your input.

Fair rules all round.

I've had too many discussions with pro-life feminists to believe otherwise :lol:

Don't worry, I haven't been looking around the site specifically for anti-woman sentiments because, if I'm being totally honest, I don't really believe that any one person can be totally anti-[insert gender here] (broadly speaking)... be it feminists supposedly hating men, or men hating women... I mean, just think about the realities of that, if it were true... hate is a STRONG word to use. If you "hated" women, you'd barely be able to walk down a high street before exploding with rage. If you hated all women you'd have a hard time being served in shops, getting your lunch, going to work... never mind being a husband and father to daughters. Maybe I'm an optimist but I'd hate to think there was a human being so all-consumed with rage that they hated the ENITRE population of the opposite gender.

What would you say if I were to tell you that, as a feminist and woman, I sympathise with that? You make the mistake of assuming that all feminists are the same, which we're not. In fact, I've probably had longer and more heated discussions with OTHER FEMINISTS than any other group.

Specifically as a childfree feminist I like to think I'm a little separated from the children debate. As a feminist I completely advocate more involved parenting for fathers (which you might be familiar with -- remember my blog article that you commented on yesterday -- I don't know if you ignored or didn't read the sections about the Cult Of Motherhood??)

See above.

Hm. I wouldn't agree with your assertion that feminism has done NOTHING for men. Take my own situation, which you're obviously unfamiliar with. My husband is a tradesman, and he hates it with a passion (yet, as with everything loves the money lol). 50 years ago he would have faced 40 years of mortgage paying for a wife to stay at home (because she had no choice) and however many kids came along as natured intended.

In 2006, I'm working hard at university so that my husband can do whatever the hell he wants with his life *whilst I earn the breadwinning money*. I'm going to be in the position where, should he want to work for a charity till the end of days, or if it makes him happy shelf stacking at Tesco, he can.. because I can earn my own money and be more independent.

I know for a fact that, whilst he's supporting me through my software engineering degree, he's hated having the "pressure"