I was just saying what do you think on her on the subject of feminism, not a different video. That one you linked was mooore than enough.
Feminism isn't 'one thing'. It has three waves and in its current third wave there are very many permutations. Not all feminists agree with each other on everything, and some do not even start from the same fundamental assumptions. There is no point to hold your hand through the differences now because they will not stick in your brain. What will stick is that 'Helm is pro-feminist'. Not what feminism is and what the differences of first and second and third wave are or what the most prominent writers on the subject advocate.
There are extremists in every political and ideological camp. I have never met a single feminist (and I've met many) in my life that advocated the neutering of males or any other population control. That cartoonish example chosen by your videoblogger is useful to her as a
straw-man and it has worked for you splendidly. You say why should I waste my time on that extremist feminist who said we should depopulate the earth from men (you shouldn't)
or by women who claim to be a part of the same group as those who do?.
What you've just done is discredit the whole women's right movement because you were presented with a crazy example. Good job.
What were the connections drawn between the crazy example and mainstream feminism (of which there are several sub-strands, mind you).
1. What she's advocating (population control) has been suggested by highly-noted mainstream feminists.
And I ask you here, Ryumaru, did you seek relevant quotes and context for her claims? Nope.
2. Since most feminists agree with the patriarchical social model (that is true, by the way) and since that model has been perpetuated by society for so long then it follows that it is in men's *nature* to be vengeful, violent, hateful and misogynistic and rapey.
This doesn't follow. She conviniently absolves the power structure of our society (that is feudalism, captialism, socialism, any underlying system itself), initself an organism for perpetuating the patriarchical model by pretending it doesn't exist and there is a group of men that structure patriarchy in some dark room, twirling mustaches.
No feminist I've known believes this.
Simple rebuttal, in human history there are known examples of
matriarchical societies. If it is in man's nature to be all these awful things, how did they ever come to pass?
The patriarchy is not genetic. In fact, genetic arguments are often thrown about by the other side, by men that think men are given to raping and destruction so 'what can you do?'. The whole of gender studies rests on the possibility that much of what we consider biological predetermination might in fact not be that, but cultural programming. It seeks to examine this programming and find ways to disrupt it.
This videoblogger is playing her audience for a fool. Due to maliciousness (I think so) or incomplete knowledge (the political intersectionality of feminism seems to completely escape her).
But now that I've done this, do you know anything more about feminism itself? Did you read any
Judith Butler? Or is the end knowledge that "Helm is pro-feminist"?
If I am right and this woman is full of shit, what will you do? Will you actually go and study something written by those weird feminists, or will you go to some other youtube channel for a better defense of sexism and male-dominated sociality?
The fact that it is titled FEMinism yet claims, at least in the most beneficial strain, to be for gender equality. Why not just call it gender equality?
You're falling for the oldest tricks in the book. There's practically FAQS answering this question, yet you didn't read any of them, you're just going by what you think feminism is, or more precisely what they've taught you through the media feminism is.
Let's see, why do they call it FEMinism and not gender equality?** One thing I did find odd about Anita's videos, was the fact that she does not allow comments on her tropes vs. women in video games series; the hypocritical nature of this is expounded upon by amazingathiest in a very civil nature ( and was retaliated by in a very aggressive fashion by feminists).
Getting rape and death threats every day for months will teach you to control your space in such a way. Nothing's stopping anyone who has an opinion on Anita's videos from making a reply on their own videos or blogs. And that's precisely what has happened. So this is a non-issue, and again, you're falling for the simplest stuff.
and as a sock-puppet for males. That seems to be some pretty high level stereotyping and objectification for someone who claims to be on the side of feminism.
You don't understand what objectification is.The video is 29 minutes long and it only took you 11 minutes to reply which means you did not listen to her entire argument.
I'm very well aware of her and I've seen many of her videos over time.
( I've dismissed a lot of stuff posted in this thread) but could you perhaps accept that there may be some close-mindedness on both sides?
Nope.
Now of course you may already have seen the video in it's entirety and be familiar with her others, but I don't think that dismisses the idea of there being close-mindedness towards her stance.
I have and yep, nope. I understand her stance completely and it is misinformed either willfully or due to ignorance. And it's doing her job excellently. This is a very important juncture where you have to either follow her example or go and educate yourself. When -and I hope- you do, we can actually disagree on real things because feminism is not a monument. Right now we're disagreeing on shadows of things, on manipulations of lies and half-truths so you can comfortably discredit a whole movement.