Discussion about this post

User's avatar
MikeDC's avatar

> First, feminism is a life-tarnishing creed for the adherent because it makes a virtue out of wallowing in antipathy and self-pity. While many self-styled feminists are kind and happy, this is largely because they don’t take their doctrine seriously. Earnest feminism reliably leads to dire character flaws.

It still seems to me that your entire argument boils down to telling people what they believe isn't really what they believe. And that's a losing argument.

Let's say 80% of self-styled feminists are kind and happy. 20% are dyed-in-the-wool man-hating harpies.

1. The 80% basically don't *need* to be told anything, because they're already kind and happy. Lecturing them about what they don't actually believe is kind of off-putting, to put it charitably. For the same reasons that, say, laying into someone for being a registered Democrat or Republican is also inappropriate.

2. The 20% who are inclined to treat people poorly and be unhappy (over the long-run)... does anyone think this is really because of dogged adherence to feminism? I don't. I expect that it's enough to have a good relationship with your daughter, model good behaviors, and be able to communicate. As you say, if your daughter grows up seeing you as fundamentally "not evil", the contest is already won. The number of people who truly, lastingly throw out healthy relationships to adhere to ideology is pretty small.

I'm sure there are exceptions, but most well-developed people don't go off and join cults.

Expand full comment
Peter Gerdes's avatar

I suspect I would agree with your criticisms in many concrete cases but it feels like you are just walking into a really obvious trap laid by the very ppl you most want to critisize regarding how they brand their movement. Why not adopt the rhetoric of: real feminism is believing that women are equal to men and the attempt to demand ever more special treatment and demean women's free rational choices in the labor market is anti-feminist?

Feminist is now a word like patriot, freedom, liberty etc... For most ppl the meaning is tied more strongly to it being a good thing than any policy preference. Especially for readers in your daughter's generation I suspect they are far more likely to see an argument that some kind of advocacy about gender is wrong as showing that's not really feminism than that feminism is bad.

It's one of the oldest tricks in the book to call your political movement, idea, law etc some kind of positive term like the freedom from tyranny bill or the patriot party so you can accuse critics of not liking freedom, patriotism etc... And the standard response is to always respond by insisting: you aren't the real patriot etc. So why walk into the buzzsaw and make ppl less reciptive to your arguments?

I get that feminist is used in a kind of motte-bailey way with ppl falling back to "it just means women are equal to men" very often but the ppl you are calling not really believing in feminists absolutely think they are feminists and just that it doesn't mean that other stuff.

Expand full comment
19 more comments...