FAQ: Feminist myths and tricks frequently used to disrupt discussion

0 views
Skip to first unread message

ste...@cygnus.ieu.comtra.org

unread,
Dec 19, 1997, 3:00:00 AM12/19/97
to

Feminist myths and tricks frequently used to disrupt discussion
---------------------------------------------------------------
[Posted in alt.mens-rights and soc.men]

The purpose of this FAQ is to briefly _identify_ prominent Feminist
myths and tricks that are frequently used to disrupt good discussions,
and by doing so, to give alt.mens-rights the tools to move onto better
discussion; to _focus_ instead of just endlessly defending against the
same old anti-male slander.

The purpose is not to argue or to prove anything to anybody. If you're
interested in more substantive material, I suggest starting with the WWW
page (Not affiliated with this FAQ or with me)
http://www.vix.com/men/index.html

After some myths I include concise rebuttals and/or pointers to further
information. Don't be misled: this is not an effort to fully explore and
rebut the Feminist nonsense in question. It is a short _reminder_ of
what's wrong with that particular Feminist lie, nothing more.

Feminist generally follow up this FAQ with attacks, regardless that it's
not directed to them nor intended to substantively prove anything. To
them, everything is a move in their "men bad, women good" game. They
don't want us to identify and name their lies. And that's a good reason
to do it.

I urge you not allow these myths to derail discussion of other issues,
even other related issues. If they have not got a clue yet, you can bet
they won't get a clue from anything you say. Instead, I suggest simply
cutting-and-pasting from this file, as some have done.

The myths below have had more than a fair hearing -- they have had
billions of hearings, here and almost everywhere else on the planet. We
in alt.mens-rights have heard and debunked these myths literally
hundreds of times. I strongly suggest we refuse to re-discuss them
endlessly. These little snippets of Feminist hatred have had their
chance already. You don't owe them another one.

I feel that any self-respecting people after having addressed the myths
_once_ should not have tolerated them any further. We don't need to be
complicit in our own defamation.


Myth: Men (or white males) have it great. Men are well
provided-for by society.

False. On _this_ planet, men are second class citizens in many
ways. This is the most cancerous myth of all and those who
proselytize it are quite beyond civilized discussion.


Trick: The preponderance of male legislators (male columnists,
etc.) demonstrates male power.

False and sexist. This is known as "The Frontman Fallacy":
looking at what _sex_ influential people are instead of looking
at _what they actually do_. Most legislators, male and female,
show favoritism to women's interests. Female circumcision is
committed almost entirely by women, yet no-one says female
circumcision demonstrates female power.


Trick: Social institutions not specifically dedicated to women
are therefore specifically dedicated to men. "Males have
_everything_ else in their favor."

False. It seems that for every issue, Feminists claim that all
_other_ issues except the one in question are working in men's
favor, and never acknowledge that they say this about every
issue!


Trick: Well, in the past and in faraway places, males had it so
good and women were treated horribly.

Not credible. This trick conveniently places the assertion far
enough away that you can't easily check it, but where the
Feminist propaganda machine can still churn out horror stories
to fit its agenda.


Myth: Domestic violence is committed primarily by men against
women.

False. National studies, such as Steinmetz, such as Straus &
Gelles, and such as McNeely, have repeatedly shown the rates
men->women and women->men to be almost exactly equal. See
http://www.vix.com/pub/men/domestic-index.html

Myth: We have to admit domestic violence _is_ committed by
women, but it's just because they were abused, so it's
still the man's fault.

False again! Researchers such as Coromae Mann have concluded "I
would not define these women as battered women, I would say they
are battering women".

Myth: The single largest cause of injury to a woman in the
U.S. is domestic violence.

False. And considering the millions of injuries in the US from
other sources, numerically ridiculous.


Myth: Women earn $0.XX per man's $1.00 for the same work.
(The $0.XX claimed varies wildly)

False. This myth refuses to take into account important
considerations such as actual hours worked (!), training, job
commitment, etc.


Myth: Men control more money than women.

False. Men work for and earn more money, but women control more
than 65% of US personal wealth, and spend 4 consumer dollars for
every consumer dollar that men spend.


Myth: Women's standard of living falls after divorce while
men's rises.

False. This myth is based on an "advocacy" study by Lenore
Weitzmann that has been long debunked, for use of
unrepresentative samples, misleading arithmetic, insistence on
counting payments from the ex-husband to the ex-wife as if he
still possessed the money, and so forth. Weitzmann openly broke
the American Sociological Association's Code Of Ethics but has
yet to be disciplined for it.


Trick: "Feminist" and "woman" are interchangeable terms. The
opposite of "Feminists" is "men". Feminist interests and
women's interests are interchangeable terms.

False and absurd. Our opinion of all women could never be so
low.


Trick: I'm a male and I agree with the Feminists that
[particular Feminist lie]

Not impressed. You're far from the first man to sell out their
own. You may believe that as what you call a "male" you're in
the perfect position to backstab men's rights, but we've heard
it all before.


Myth: Choice for men is about men trying to evade parental
responsibilities.

False and sexist. In the US, choice for men would give men only
the rights women have had since Roe v Wade, nothing more. It
would not let the man compel the woman to abort. See
http://www.nas.com/c4m


Trick: People who oppose Feminists are "threatened by strong
women"

It is manipulative and arrogant to imply that the only flaw
feminists could possibly have is to be "too strong".


Trick: Feminists just want equality. Feminism is about people.

The anti-male nature of Feminists is so obvious, so huge, so
outrageous, that to discuss this myth would only dignify it
undeservedly. And we've all noticed that purveyors of this trick
don't object when the "Why should Feminism do anything for men"
trick is used.


Trick: Why should Feminism do anything for men? Why don't men
form their own groups instead of demanding that Feminism
behave itself?

We do, and obviously we lack the political clout of Feminism.
But given Feminism's constant use of appeal to pity, it is
enormously hypocritical to now say "Who cares about you, we got
ours!" And we've all noticed that purveyors of this trick don't
object when the "Feminism is about people" trick is used.


Myth: Differences in the skills and behaviour of men and women
are all caused by socialisation. Thus in principle all
women can do most jobs as well as all men.

There is an enormous middle ground between biological
determinism and cultural determinism. Both extremes are
ridiculous. We should not accept the socialization-causes-it-all
theory as "the alternative" to biological determinism.

Trick: Women have it worse because violence against women is
increasing at a faster rate than violence against men.

This is the Fallacy of Confounding the Derivative with the
Function. Men have it much worse, as evinced by the two major
U.S. Department of Justice crime measures. The actual
victimization rates for women are still much lower than those of
men.


Trick: You can't criticize Feminism because no statement you
make is true of _all_ Feminists.

This trick tries to block discussion by making it impossible to
express your thought. The writer simply specifies that by
"Feminism", he means mainstream Feminism, misandry. Another
approach is to qualify the term: "Gender Feminism",
"Biofeminism", or "Radical Feminism". And if Feminism really was
so random, by the same token you wouldn't be able say anything
positive about it.


Trick: Well _I_ don't approve of [some particular Feminist
evil]. Only some rare radical Feminists do. Maybe.

If you genuinely don't, then we weren't criticizing _you_. But
generally the statement is part of the old good cop / bad cop
routine. Do you ever actually criticize the misandrists? Ever
advance new arguments against Feminist policies or actions? Ever
spread the word about the latest Feminist outrage? Or do you
just tell _us_ to stop holding Feminism accountable?


Trick: There is no Feminist agenda. <sarcasm> I must have been
away when the agenda was handed out </sarcasm>

That tactic has become a favorite one to deflect criticism about
the activities being conducted on their behalf. Movements don't
exist without agendas, nor can they be effective without a
fairly high degree of uniformity among their supporters.


Trick: I don't speak for Feminism, just for myself. I'm not
accountable for Feminism. Feminism is not accountable
for me.

Fair enough if it came from a real non-Feminist. But if you have
argued in defense or support of Feminism, you have shown your
colors and we won't forget it for your convenience. It's also
fair to hold Feminism accountable for you if other Feminists
refrain from significantly criticizing you.


Trick: You're a misogynist!

Misogyny has a precise meaning: Hatred of women _as a class_.
Those who use the term irresponsibly are both unfairly
pretending there's much more misogyny than there really is and
also demonizing people. If someone calls you a misogynist just
because you are in conflict with an individual woman or you
don't support special priveleges for women, they owe you a huge
apology. (But good luck getting it)


Trick: No man can know how awful childbirth is.

False. We have wives, sisters, mothers, female friends, and so
forth, and we have a pretty good idea of what is and is not
involved. We're not about to be bluffed into giving more
sympathy than is merited or bullied into playing dumb.


Trick: You're just as bad as the feminists. They hate men, you
hate feminists.

Come off it. Anyone who can't see the difference between hating
a birth-group (men) and hating a hate-group back (feminists)
needs to pull their head out.


Trick: Anyone who opposes Feminism is a reactionary who wants
to go "back to the past". Feminism is "progress".

Anti-feminists are not neccessarily traditionalists. The author
is a proud anti-feminist and is not a traditionalist. And not
everyone agrees that Feminism is "progress". On the contrary,
most here think Feminism has been a disaster.


Trick: Why is SO IMPORTANT to you to argue about [some
particular gender issue]?

You should be asking this of Feminists, not of Antifeminists.
The Feminists invented the "Which sex has it worse?" issue with
all its variations and invented countless lies about it. It was
only when the lies were thrown in our face over and over that we
realized we had to defend men. Why attack Antifeminists for
defending men, and say nothing to Feminists for attacking men in
the first place?


Trick: Men are responsible for wars. This justifies many sorts
of manbashing, including the all-male draft.

You mean, men _are sent_ to war. Surely sending a birth group to
their deaths does not justify further discrimination against
that group.

Trick: You're not a woman so you could never understand.

And when's the last time you told a female Feminist she could
never hope to understand because she's not a man? And so the
only people who can comment on gender issues are people who have
had sex change operations?


Suggested answers for more general tactics, so that you don't have to
knock yourself out phrasing a new answer every time they use the old
tactic:

Suggested response to obvious Feminist lies:

Thank you for demonstrating once again that Feminists will say
anything and listen to nothing.

Suggested response to Feminist backpedalling:

As usual, the Feminist response to being caught at something stinky
is to simply crank out more lies and disingenuity.

Suggested response to Feminists disputing common sense:

Thank you for another example of how Feminists need to destroy
common sense.

Suggested response when Feminists indicate they just don't care about
fairness:

Thank you for demonstrating once again the moral bankruptcy of
Feminism.

Suggested response when a Feminist relates suspicious anecdotal
"evidence":

"On the Internet, no-one knows your tales are lies" -- or so you
Feminists seem to think.

_Pithy_ additions and enhancements sought. No entry should exceed 3
80-column lines of myth and 8 lines of debunk, to prevent it from
becoming a sprawling, unfocused treatise. Every entry should be a
Feminist myth that has actually been raised in this newsgroup. Please
reply in the newsgroup, as I cannot receive email (it will bounce).

If you wish to claim that these myths are in fact true, you're too late.
You've had your hearing and you convinced me and others that purveyors
of these myths will never be honest or reasonable.

I wish to thank those who have commented constructively on this FAQ.

--
Steve Reynolds, ste...@cygnus.ieu.comtra.org

"Feminism is to female as racism is to race."


ste...@cygnus.ieu.comtra.org

unread,
Dec 25, 1997, 3:00:00 AM12/25/97
to
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages