I hadn’t wondered about this question at all — I just assumed feminist was synonymous with feminazi — but that just shows how much I know. I was very helpfully sent a cartoon to help me tell the difference.
So…the message I take home from this is that feminists are slender and conventionally pretty, while feminazis are fat, ugly, (uh-oh, so far I’m clearly a feminazi) and want to oppress men (whew! Off the hook!). This is a very strange distinction, since I suspect that the number of people who fit the feminazi definition are few and far between, and it means that the anti-feminists must really like Amanda Marcotte and Rebecca Watson.
I don’t think this is going to work.
But it did make me curious, and I went searching for other distinguishing characteristics, and bleeeargh, did Google vomit forth an amazing catalog of non-feminists scribbling imaginary enemies into cartoons. Here’s another example of a similar approach, which gets even weirder. Apparently, feminists bathe regularly, unlike feminazis, and also wear nice dresses and don’t use sarcasm.
As near as I can tell, this is from a bestiary of imaginary creatures.
It’s also from the pen of a charming man who is dedicated to equal rights for EVERYBODY
, which is why he drew this little image in support of the noble goals of #GamerGate.
Actually I’m not antisemitic. I love kikes just as much as I love niggers and faggots. Awww have I offended your little SJW feels with my awful words? Suck it up, shithead. ACTIONS are what count in the real world. Words don’t mean a fucking thing. Being offended doesn’t mean a fucking thing either.
I support equal rights for EVERYBODY from every walk of life but I hate word policing and social justice warriors with all my heart.Get on my level, you hypersensitive little cunt!
That kind of summarizes what I hear from the #GamerGate goons all the time: they looooove equality, they just hate social justice and people who fight for social justice.
Charming. Just charming. I’m old, fat, ugly, wear big glasses (no-line trifocals), don’t wear makeup, and I’m a feminist. I guess that automatically makes me a feminazi. But wait – I’m married to a man I love, I bathe regularly, and I have no tattoos. Classify that, dude. *raspberries*
So typing gendered/racial/ethnic/sexual slurs and publishing them to the internet isn’t an action, eh? Good to know. Also good to know that characterizing anyone who objects to your words-which-are-totally-not-actions is being hypersensitive and thus should not be paid any attention. Which is also not an action.
As near as I can tell, a lot of gamergate types love the concept of paper equality, as long as it doesn’t translate into actual equality. Otherwise, they wouldn’t mind women voicing their opinions of the problems with some the games out there. Same is true with a lot of bigots. “We treat all CVs equally”, while putting any name that sounds black/hispanic/foreign directly to the reject pile.
No self inspection going on to see if they are only paying just lip service to the concept of equality. As long as they are more equal than others, they are happy. *snicker*
I’m confused, why does he just ask this of “sjw” people?
Does he not care about the feelings of Jews, black people, and gays?
Or does he think all Jewish people, black people, and gay people are automatically sjw people…and therefore slurs against them don’t matter?
Well of course, there are the “cool” ones that don’t mind slurs (in fact they probably don’t mind an arbitrarily long list of whatever else he thinks is ok, too). All others are SJWs.
So, basically a feminist is a woman who supports the status quo, makes dude-boners hard and is happy to do so.
She probably also makes wonderful sandwiches
It had never even occurred to me pose myself the question of Sarkeesian’s family history.
I don’t believe you. This is vile.
If you think the worth of a woman’s views is contingent on her appearance, you are an undeniable worthless sexist, full stop, do not pass go and kindly shut up while the adults talk.
My takeaway is that I was a feminist when I was young and cute and turned into a feminazi as I grew older and fatter.
Seriously this is a classic strawman argument where they create a caricature of the opposing view and argue against that, rather than the actual positions of women and feminists.
I see that pesky feminist hair is still a problem. :shakes head:
It’s always interesting how much this breaks down when the words cause the mighty dudebros offense.
Which one is the contagious cootie carrier?
As soon as a link to this post hit twitter, a lot of people angrily fired back, saying that I fit all the characteristics of a feminazi…and confirming exactly what I wrote here. It’s weird. Have they no self-awareness at all?
And really, they were citing The Amazing Atheist. I am flabbergasted.
As far as I know, being involved in politics, fighting for women in disadvantaged areas and knowing what rape is also get women called feminazis, fat, ugly and worse.
PZ @ 12:
They do seem to specialize in obliviousness (and a clear lack of reading comprehension).
Wow. That takes me back. I had no idea anyone considered him remotely relevant these days.
I figured that the way to tell if a woman is a feminazi is to look at yourself. Am I the kind of person who thinks women are secretly controlling the world? If so, then they’re all feminazis. If not, then they’re feminists.
Sounds a lot like if you have an opinion on feminism you’re a feminazi. Oh and the second one seems to be pulling some class warfare nonsense with the highly educated & helping disadvantaged people (preferably on another continent) getting compared to tattoos, eating habits and some bizarre fantasies about personal hygiene.
I’m guessing from context that males get an automatic pass because if they’re loud and opinionated and pro-feminism they’re just lying to get into someone’s pants. Which is presumably obnoxious but not nearly as terrifying as women expressing opinions. Or literally anyone with glasses. Apparently they’re afraid of glasses too.
@PZ
I’m not happy with your (re-)publishing the racist caricature of Anita Sarkeesian. I guess my hive-mind shots aren’t up to date.
The difference between feminist and -nazi seems to be that the latter believes she has a right to be her own person, and doesn’t exist solely to please and flatter men.
So we have a person drawing Anita Sarkeesian in a way that is clearly meant to demonize her, doing so in a way that mimics Jewish, anti-semitic caricatures, dropping racial slurs and bleating about the evils of Political Correctness while doing so, and we are supposed to take them at their word that they love Jewish people? Uh huh. I would really like to see the people who fall for that line of “thinking”.
As for the other cartoons: They juxtapose nicely with the previous blog entry, “Ken Ham lectures us on True Science”.
Also: gotta love the focus on appearance in all three cartoons. I especially love “Makes snarky comments” as one of the Evil Tell-Tale Signs of a Feminazi. Oh no! Not snark! Because certainly none of the cartoons above involved anything resembling snark! Surely these good folks would not mock anyone ever!
That’s a weird sort of equality, where they keep oppressing and harassing the shit out of people. Hmmm.
Well, let’s see… I have a glass of vin, beer, Schnaps, whiskey, whisky, something that is orange and shooting out blue fireballs, and rum. The only one that scares me is the water — no tell what is in that…
I’m sure that the next cartoon from these assholes will be “How to tell the difference between a Black person and a n****r.”
Okay, I’ll come right out and admit it: I’m basically a freeze peach extremist. Even this sort of worthless bile is, to me, protected. But at the same time the “just words” defense is worse than useless. It is actively harmful. Whether we’re talking the Romani people, the Jews of eastern Europe, or the Tutsi in Africa, dehumanization is a near universal precursor to violence. If history teaches us anything, it is that horrors stem not from big issues, but rather from small issues overblown.
But I thought you were a mangina? This stuff is so confusing……
Sometimes they look like the kind of people who would throw rocks and a flock of birds just to kick up a flurry. (Yuck.)
They are close to convincing me to give up on the human race and become a hermit (with my two male housemates).
I agree that actions count and saying those things and drawing that are two actions that demosntrate loud and clear what a gigantic piece of shit this arsehole is.
aelfric @ 22:
I am at a loss as to why you felt this was necessary. Is the OP about wiping the ‘net clean of such nastiness? Is the thread full of people yelling “censor it now!”? Gives a good look, the answer is no.
Nah, that requires enough intelligence to work out that the ‘*’s are placeholders, and then what letters they stand for. I mean, these kooks are afraid of cooties, so assuming they can assemble any sort of thought, no matter how repugnant, is like believing Orcs ate all the reasonable republicans.
(Hum… The Orcs-ate-them hypothesis would explain a lot a things…)
Some of the problems reflected in these cartoons:
Whiny privileged antifeminists see fighting for women’s rights and against privilege as a form of seeking female domination because they ignore existing privileges and want to believe that equality exists.
Whiny privileged antifeminists see any talk about rape as uncomfortable and want to ignore any possible way we could combat rape that doesn’t involve potential victims personally protecting themselves. They ignore any role of culture, and any route for improving the situation by improving that culture, and thus avoid culpability. They will continue to freak the fuck out if you consider their apologetics support and contribution to rape culture and will conflate that with you accusing them of being a rapist.
Whiny privileged antifeminists are the kind of asshats who are blinded by the slightest amount of disrespect. They demand perfect civility from their opposition, and yet also support other antifeminists who will heap on personalized abuse (see the insults about appearances in all of the above cartoons), bigoted slurs, and will shout out the most illogical and ridiculous rhetoric in return . They are hypocrites to the very core, whether they realize it or are blinded to it.
Whiny privileged antifeminists are ultimately slacktivists who hate both activism and slacktivism that they do not believe in. They will try to boil things down to general principles, by mocking people for not being productive enough, or alternatively mocking people for being Too Political. They believe neither argument. They are perfectly content with slacktivism, and are actually most comfortable with it. They are perfectly comfortable with things being Political, as long as it lines up with their personal political preferences.
Whiny privileged antifeminists really fucking abhor discussion of rape in general. For whatever reason, they do not like the actual definition of rape. They do not like calling a rape a rape. They have a laundry list of things they don’t consider rape, even if consent wasn’t actually granted. That list depends on the antifeminist, the victim in question, and perhaps the phase of the fucking moon. They will claim that they know what rape “really is”, and will tut-tut the evil feminazis who dare say that having sex with a drunk woman is rape, but ultimately they are full of shit and wrong. In this case it is hard to tell whether it is just privilege, if it is motivated reasoning at work, if they are trying to justify their own behavior or a friend’s behavior, if they want to have certain things still counted as valid pick-up tactics, etc. Who fucking knows, but it is still the most fucking odious and disgusting thing in the long list of terrible fucking things the anti-feminists do in the holy name of the Status Quo.
@Iyeska, flos mali
Did I consider that necessary? No. Take it for what it’s worth: a bit of internet confession.
I am so fucking tired of these people who are “all for equality” and proudly declare to have no problem with whatever minority (they are missing a neon sign that says “look how good i am, i’m not beating up any gays”), but who use slurs gratuitously and act like doing so makes them some kind of hero…
You use slurs because you are prejudiced fucks. There is literally no other reason why you would ever use those slurs. You use them because you want to remind others that they are not the same as you, that they are the minority and that they are les powerful than you. You use them because it is a level of oppression that you typically can get away with. and you fucking know it.
I also fucking hate it when they come back with something on the lines of “i have a friend who doesn’t mind that i call hir “x” and uses that word hirself”…..jesus fucking christ, seriously? My cousin knew an arab immigrant that became a neo-nazi…so fucking what?
My guess, and it’s just a guess based on a number of observations and some thinking, is that these SQW’s (Status Quo Warriors, you can use that, you’re welcome) are basing their hate on a pretty simple heuristic:
If you’re working to reassure their entrenched opinions and the Way The World Is, then you’re a fine upstanding ally.
If you’re working to change the system, then you are an Evil Other deserving of hatred.
I will stand by this until I have seen good evidence otherwise or some well-thought out refutation.
Except for conservative Christians, I’ve never seen a group go to so much effort to present themselves as complete dicks and then whine about how they are such martyrs.
@fpjeromeiv
I LOVE “SQW.” That’s awesome. But are we playing their game if we start using that? Honest question. I want to start spreading that everywhere, but am conflicted.
@fpjeromeiv
useful acronym and hypothesis bookmarked.
@aelfric
playing what game? SJW isn’t even a bad thing. Labeling something that is actually bad is useful. As long as you aren’t being misrepresentative of those you label. Perhaps it would help if you outlined exactly what people who decry SJWs are doing wrong, then you would be able to compare if decrying SQWs would be similarly wrong.
fpjeromeiv @ 31:
:snort: Excellent.
I would use the acronym, SRW to describe misogynists. Social Regression Warrior.
Since regression is the opposite of progression.
aelfric
Are we playing their game if we start using that? Well here are three questions to test that:
1. Are you mocking the very idea of fairness using this insult?
2. Are you using this insult as a means to silence those looking to improve a significant amount of people’s lives?
3. Are you using this insult in a manner that implies that people shouldn’t “fight” for causes and are thus being ridiculously hypocritical by flinging the insult passionately in internet argument after internet argument?
If answered “no” to the above questions, then you are playing a different game!
I too approve of Status Quo Warrior as an insult.
@brianpansky
I feel labels are reductive–“SJW” being an archetypal example. SJW basically means “person I oppose/dislike/hate” to the GamerGate/MRA/Jackass crowd. I don’t want to do that, as such. People on what I believe to be the wrong side of this argument might very well come from different places. In addition, I feel that a label like that will only enhance their ridiculous claims to ‘victimhood’ for lack of a better term. I really like SQW and want to use it, but something tells me it won’t help matters.
If I was really into trying to insult the gamergate crowd, I would start with something like Epsilon Male Parrots, or some other noisy, squawky animal. Low level and nothing but noise.
Nerd of Redhead, you just made the Collosal Kea very angry….
;)
“I’m not racist / sexist / homophobic / etc., I hate all groups equally! Check mate!”
^ Every racist / sexist / homophobe / etc. ever.
If I did fall that far I’d hope the impact would kill me before the rest of you CHUDs showed up.
aelfric: Nothing will help matters with a certain subset of the MRA Brigade. The others have a very low threshold for victimhood if they believe themselves victimized because we turned a mirror image of their own insult back on them. There is no reason to believe that perfect civility and utter abstinence from any labels or insults or mockery is the magic bullet to bring these assclowns back to their senses. Of course, neither is it proven that insults or mockery are the magic bullets either. But that’s the point: we have no reason to fear these tactics either. They will survive being called Status Quo Warriors. It will be fine.
I want to like SQW, but they already name themselves and those they oppose so perfectly. Our side is “social justice warriors” and “white knights”. They on the other hand refer to themselves as “trolls” and “slyme”. Proudly and obliviously.
aelfric:
It’s just fucking shorthand, a lot of us already reference those who fight to keep the status quo in place. If you want to squirm over it, fine, don’t fucking use it. That freeze peach of yours just took a dive, didn’t it?
PZ
I find my brain pretty flabbered at that too. If our side were as vile and obsessed as these assholes, we could make a similar cartoon that uses the disgusting fecal masturbation porn video made by that troglodyte to illustrate the typical mindset of those atheists who think misogyny is normal behavior. We don’t have to resort to stereotypes or racism or hate to make our point, it’s gotten so that the slime is now self-refuting. (also teh amazing atheist is far from height-weight proportionate but I am certain that his excess adipose is not the source of his pathological behavior issues)
“Get on my level”? Dude, I levelled up long ago. It’s not my fault you’re stuck on level one. L2P, n00b!
aelfric @22
Sure free speech is fine and all, but don’t be fooled that these SQWs are interested in free speech. They want to say whatever they want, but they howl like a wounded puppy when somebody uses free speech to denounce their hate. Saying something racist or sexist, “cool free speech bro”. Pointing out somebody said something racist or sexist, “Whoa femisnazi, shut up! WITCH HUNT!”. They don’t give a shit about free speech.
@Iyeska, flos mali
“That freeze peach of yours just took a dive, didn’t it?”
No, actually. I’m not even sure what you mean.
@HappyNat
Yeah, I felt that was something I needed to include as a bit of a confession, but I completely agree. Whatever they say, the GG/MRA/SQW crowd are profoundly against freeze peach.
aefric @ 49
You’re self censoring because you’re concerned about the consequences of what you say. You lose some of your freeze peach extremist cred by being willing to do that.
No, thank you. That subterranean a level would wreak havoc on my delicate sinuses. Besides, I do my best to avoid jerks like you. (Oh, dear. That wasn’t too harsh, was it? No fear. You are tough [in your own mind] and can handle it. Perhaps with another unbridled outburst.)
It’s certainly good to know these #GamerGate people aren’t spending all their time whining on the internet because they’re offended by people’s words.
It probably doesn’t occur to him that Jews, black people, or gays have feelings.
@vaiyt #13: Obviously, Rush Limbaugh foresaw today’s world wide web when he popularized the term “feminazi” in the early 1990s. He couldn’t have been talking about women involved in politics back then, since they are feminists.
So the game reviews #GamerGate is allegedly about don’t mean a fucking thing. Anita Sarkeesian’s criticisms of sexist stereotyping in games don’t mean a fucking thing. If anyone’s offended by either of those things, they should just suck it up because being offended doesn’t mean a fucking thing. So… what’s #GamerGate about again?
Why? I went through all this effort to climb up to this level, I’ve got more to go and you want me to go back down to the basement to start digging?
Fuck that noise.
Actions like writing the above? That was an action, yet you seem to be saying it doesn’t matter. Are you confused or did you just waste your time because you have so much of it available. Have you thought about getting a hobby, like stamp collecting, or just going outside and enjoying the day? Those are actions that not only have far more value to society than the action you took to write the above, but also have the benefit of not announcing that you are a petty, small-minded person. In fact, they might help you not be a petty, small-minded person who feels they need to take actions like writing the above.
I’ve seen some people use Social Justice Warrior as a way of saying “You’re fighting for the right things, you’re just being a little too gung ho about it,” but I think that the current usage by the G G crowd is an outgrowth from that, original usage being much less hostile.
If they hate “word policing” why do they get so testerically enraged by feminist words!?
Self awareness, they lack it.
fpjeromeiv #31
I too love your acronym and hope it spreads far and wide. I look forward to hearing people who don’t think we should object to Just Words whine about being called SQWs.
What’s with the clipboard? Is a clipboard a mandatory accessory for the fashion-forward feminazi?
And if words don’t matter–only actions do–then why do all these MRAs and Gamer DudeBros spend so much time talking smack online? Is it a form of masturbation for them?
I can imagine the cover to the SQW Comic Book now. Generic comic book rubble all over, a bright light exploding behind Newt Gingrich and Rush Limbaugh, their suits tattered, their inexplicable rippling muscles exposed, impeccable coifs in disarray as a fedora-wearing figure in the shadows shouts: “But it’s not over yet! To the INTERNET!”
It’s interesting that the not-really-antisemitic not-really-racist not-really-a-homophobe draws an antisemitic caricature of Sarkeesian and so, presumably, thinks she’s Jewish. The name “Sarkeesian” is Armenian, and her parents are Armenian immigrants to Canada, but not-really-antisemites do tend to identify people they dislike as Jews.
(rambling about this stack of quotes)
To these spigots, there are only two kinds of [othered group], whether Jews, black people, queers, women or whatever. Good [others], who don’t make a fuss about bigotry and dehumanization leveled their way, and bad [others] who expect to be treated like real people. Note that the bad [others] have special words directed at them, like feminazi, fag, or kike, instead of just the usual group names with extra venom. Meanwhile all [others] share the characteristic of being fair game for said bigotry – being told that no, you’re one of the GOOD [others] just reinforces that relative safety from dehumanization is a gift status granted by whoever’s calling you a GOOD [other]. It means nothing past ‘play along and I might not dehumanize you, personally, after all. Like I do to them.‘
As a diehard cynic, I’d like to take this moment to be unreasonably optimistic: I take this as an indication that the feminists are actually winning the fight, even if it doesn’t seem so right now. For years, there has been no effort to even acknowledge that feminists may have good ideas (i.e. all feminists were feminazis by definition), but now there’s an attempt to coopt part of it to prevent it from making any new progress.
Also, I don’t want to call these folks warriors. Maybe Status Quo Blaggards.
let me try this again the last one got lost when unbeknown by me I was signed off while I was slowly writing.
I think there is an older name for these SQW’s or SQB’s
that is reactionary. I like the baggage it carries from the past. All the names are good if they stimulate more irrational reactions like we have been seeing of late.
They remind me of Peronists
uncle frogy
I am amused. Firstly, what exactly does feminism and otherkin have to do with each other, or are they simply trying to imply that ‘feminazis’ will believe anything they hear? Second… otherkin, as in people who identify with that label, ARE real. Their beliefs might be, and are probably false, but otherkin do exist.
/tangent from a person who identifies as otherkin via psychological factors rather than reincarnation.
If you’d prefer not legitimizing them by calling them warriors, call them Status Quo Warmongers. But at that point we might as well just call them Republicans.
ck @ 63:
Eh, it works for me, as the snarky part of Social Justice Warrior is the warrior bit. They certainly fight very hard to maintain the status quo, so I think SQW is fine.
Oh, I love these comics. I should start collecting them. I came across this one back in August on the “Being Feminist” facebook page, posted by an anti-feminist commenter. Notice how the second wave feminist – you know, Steinem, Dworkin, Greer, MacKinnon, that kind of feminist – is all smiles and positive results. The women that these losers quote in order to show how eeeeevil modern feminism has become are depicted as kind, happy women who achieved good things in the pursuit of worthy goals. It’s amazing how that happens. When they want ammunition to throw at feminists, the second wavers are their bogeywomen, because they were extremely (justifiably) pissed off and didn’t honeycoat their criticisms of society and the ways that men treated women, but when they want to show how they’re totes not sexist honest, they’re just a group of happy-looking women who achieved great things, against whom third wavers fail compare poorly.
It’s almost as if the conclusions are worth more to them than the validity or consistency of their arguments, ain’t it?
Ok? So why are you so offended that you’d come out with this in the first place? Words don’t mean a fucking thing, and all “SJW’s” have to hurt you is words, so why the whinyface? I has a confused!
“Aims to tackle oppression and physical abuse in DISADVANTAGED PARTS OF THE WORLD”.
Hey, in Uganda and Iran gays are killed, so what all those damn fags have to complain about in the West!?
And will you pleas stop complaining about religion’s tax exemptions, when there are still brutal theocracies?
/sarcasm
“Words don’t mean a fucking thing.”
Which is precisely why he doesn’t mind being called out as a bigot (by any reasonable definition, intentionally calling people derogatory names counts as bigoted behavior), right?
Athywren wrote:
I suspect you don’t has a confused, but it’s typical bully behaviour. They may push you around all they want with impunity, but if you push back, then you must be held responsible for your aggressive actions. They may call you whatever slur they want to use, but if you say anything bad about them (no matter how tame), you will be held responsible for apparently hurting their feelings.
I’d like to believe that those first two cartoons are trying, in a poorly thought-out sort of way, to help. That they’re actually trying to seperate the feminazi caricature from the feminist reality, and all we have to do is tell them that some of the shorthands they’re to exaggerate ‘feminazi’ characteristics are insulting and wrong-headed, and they’d stop using them.
I’d like to believe that. I really would.
I like SQW. Can we add FPW, “freeze peach warrior”?
What I learned from GamerGate today, the way you discern someone’s ideology is based entirely on body weight and semblance to Nazi propaganda posters!
Gee, thanks GamerGate!
Sarkeesian seems like an Armenian name FWIW. These creeps seem particularly vile. As vile as the KKK. I fear for my daughter going out into this world.
FIFY:
Status Quo Worriers
(“warrior” has too many positive connotations to apply here.)
Like Malala Yousafzai, who’s been called, among other things, ugly, un-bangable and a coward by the luminaries of the Manosphere?
Vaiyt:
Just lovely.
Shorter:
Feminist: a person who fights for women’s rights.
Feminazi: an imaginary creature invented by reactionaries who hate feminists
Terska
-ian is almost always an Armenian name. not a hard and fast rule mind you.
just a quick note from your local armchair linguist. :)
(… it is also more nuanced than “warrior”)
vaiyt:
Oh yes, such a coward! You know, I’m almost heartened when they overreach like that. This is a kid who was shot in the face, and whose “cowardice” is that she chooses not to go back and be murdered. Even among collosal douches, there will be many who read that and think “seriously? You do know this is real life, not an FPS?”
Gamergate Logic: Calling the above caricature stupid and bigoted is overreacting and hypersensitive. Sending a bomb threat to a university because someone you don’t like is going to be speaking there is rational and reasonable.
@Ryan Cunningham, there really are such creatures as “feminazis,” or at least, there are such women who would fit the (man-hating, female chauvinist) definition of “feminazi.” it’s just that these people are so inanely loopy that sane people who lack bile fascination (i.e., that weird need to stop and gawk at a trainwreck) ignore them entirely.
When I call them “inanely loopy,” I’m talking about the sort of person who insists that all sex, including consensual sex, is rape, therefore is bad, and must never be done, or who believes that all societal ills can be alleviated by restructuring society to relegate all males to the status of breeding studs, who are to be raised in special facilities away from women.
I like Nerd’s acronym – SRW, Social Regression Warrior. These arsewipes think women would reduce women to servility if they could.
Or Social Regression Wankers, given theophontes’ point about warrior having positive connotations, and these creeps having constant rageboners about women daring to exist while not fucking them.
@stanton
That sounds suspiciously straw man-ish. I have met many people of many political persuasions, and even the most radical feminists I have known (and some were quite radical) wouldn’t fit that description.
Of course, it is merely the misogynists way of attempting to refute progressive ideas like social justice with extreme hyperbole. They simply make themselves look stupid when they do so. Which is why I always point and laugh at the Epsilon Males making such a stupid and unevidence fuckwittery.
I’m confused–I thought you were saying that such people DO exist. Did you mean to type, “they don’t exist,” but left out the N and the apostrophe and the T?
Except when they come from Sarkeesian. Then the little misogynist assholes get their feelings hurt and she must be threatened with violence to shut up.
Aw, did I hurt your feels, you MRA shit-for-brains piece of shit?
if words don’t mean a fucking thing, the fuck are they all so pissed at Sarkeesian about? or at “SJWs” in general? SJWs/Sarkeesian also only use words, after all.
stanton @ 87
“All sex” that doesn’t include consent is rape.
Do feminazis actually exist?
@stanton
I’ve no doubt such creatures exist in the wild somewhere. If we are to meet them, rest assured that we disapprove of their view. Still, I’d not call them “feminazis”, because that’s a loaded term invented by Rush Limbaugh and adopted by right-wingers to throw mud at feminists in general.
Feminist/Nazi seems like a contradiction in terms.
There doesn’t seem to be much of feminism in anything the Nazis did.
…hands up anyone who self-identifies as a feminazi.
I mean raise your hand if you…
Thanks for the mention. U could have at least dropped my twitter handle @7UC1F3R
Every group has extreemists! Reality doesn’t fit into neat libtard ‘logic’.
I approve of SQW. It’s perfect.
Your twitter handle is lucifer? Really? How… trite, actually. Just like your use of ‘libtard’. Shoo.
More like “Tucifer”.
Rowan vet-tech wrote:
Worse still is that it’s a l33tsp33k version of lucifer. That’s more than a little bit pathetic, especially for an apparently grown man. I honestly feel a bit sorry for him.
Nope.
I haven’t been here long enough. Who is this guy?
Saad
Nobody.
Joseph Hazelton @99:
I don’t think anyone has made an argument that extremists do not exist among feminists. Do any of these extremists, though, actually have a measurable effect on any of the various versions of feminist thought today? For instance, we know that there are anti-choice activists willing to commit murder to end a woman’s right to choose. We know there are activists who want to make any abortion, for any reason, illegal. We know that there are activists who seek to deny any access to any form of birth control. These are but two examples of extremists in the anti-woman campaign and they are three examples who have a very real impact on the politics of the USA. The impact is so strong that, for one major political party, being anti-choice and anti-contraception is a virtual litmus test for eligibility in primary elections (and thus general elections as well), and they studiously ignore the political terrorism of the forced-birthers because politicians know that coming out in favour of murderers could lose them votes and saying that killing doctors is wrong will lose them votes. The extremists of the misogyny wing of the USA affects the political culture and relative political power in the USA.
Where are the feminist extremists? What effect are they having? If there is an extremist wing to feminism which really does hold the ideals you attribute to them, and they have no effect on either feminism or politics, does is even matter? The mildest forms of feminism (the idea that women are actually full human beings with all concomitant rights of humanity) are vilified and ridiculed in political discourse, in most news media, in popular literature, and even cartoons — feminism does not really have an extremist wing mostly because, thanks to a very successful propaganda campaign, any form of feminism is too extreme. Yet feminism does have an impact in politics. And it is smaller than the effect of the most extreme radical right-wing anti-woman, anti-poor, anti-government, forced birthers.
So, again, I would ask you, even if you can find a feminist who holds to the ideals you have assigned her, why would it matter?
See, I get told this every now and then; out there, somewhere, there are people like this. I, or someone, ask where, and 1 of 3 things happens:
1) No examples are given.
2) An example is given, and it’s clear to anyone remotely honest that the example does not contain what it’s purported to contain.
3) I’m accused of being a feminazi.
At thus point, it’s rather clear that a) such people don’t exist in any appreciable quantity, to extent that such people exist at all, and b) the actual definition of “feminazi” is “feminist I don’t like.”
Lucifer? Huh! Not even the real Prince of Darkness, just a cheap copy.
Wait, don’t the gamergate people keep defending it by saying it is about reviews, and not misogyny? And aren’t reviews nothing but words? But I thought words don’t mean a thing? So what are our gamergate pals fighting for?
Being perceived as the toughest bully on the playground….
Ooh! This game is fun. Can I play, too?
Dragons DO exist. They’re ancient creatures with long fangs who can breathe fire. They have armored scale hides that are impenarable, and they can soar through the skies on wings. Their only love is gold.
Okay. We have feminazis and dragons covered. Anyone want to try Sasquatch or chupacabre?
@99
Oh, my ears and whiskers, 733tsp33k! Now, that really takes me back, to, what? the late 90s? Is is possible there are still script kiddies preserved out there, like the Lost Boys in Peter Pan, only infinitely more pathetic?
I don’t know what “impenarable” is but it sounds scaaaaary.
;)
From the OP:
These little fucknuggets kill me.
They get so mad and frustrated that people dare to criticize them for using gendered or racial slurs so they tell us that these words don’t mean a thing and don’t have any power. Yet they’ve just gotten emotional over the use of words to criticize them.
Then there’s the problem of trying to minimize the power of words when there’s ample evidence that they very much affect us–and not just in one direction (offense).
Words have the power to engage us and draw us in. How many people have read a really fantastic book by a writer that draws you into the world, or gets you engaged in a character such that you actually care about what happens to that character?
That’s the power of words.
How many atheists engage in debates with theists, hoping to sway them (or the other way around)? Debates use words (wow I feel silly saying that). Those words, when strung together properly and with a strong enough argument, can be enough to sway opinions. Words can change minds.
That’s the power of words.
How many people have worked up the courage to ask someone on a date, only to be rejected for whatever reason? Sure some people bounce back and take rejection well. Others get bummed out. They get melancholy. They get morose. Due to words.
That’s the power of words.
Conversely, how many people have worked up the courage to ask someone on a date, and found that person has accepted? Remember that joy? Remember that happiness? Remember those butterflies? You got those all from words that were spoken.
That’s the power of words.
What about grandparents who hear from their child that they’re going to be grandparents?
The college student who finds they haven’t been accepted to medical school?
The lesbian couple who learn that their state legalized same-sex marriage, so they can get married after years of wanting to do so?
Four little words–“Will You Marry me”–can have such power over people. It can cause people to squeem* in joy or recoil in horror. Words did that.
The feeling in your gut…the sorrow…the anger…the frustration you feel when you hear the words “You’re fired”?
All of that, and so much more…that’s the power of words. Words touch us. They affect our moods. They have the power to uplift up us or tear us down to the deepest, darkest doldrums. They have the power to take us on flights of fantasy that we’ve never dreamed of or stir unspeakable rage inside us. They have the power to bring our darkest fears to light and to showcase our greatest triumphs.
To deny the power of words is to deny reality.
*You know how people see a picture of a cute cat and go “Squeeeee”? That’s a squeem.
Gone. All gone. FtB, why you no like me and eat my comment? I did not haz words to trip PZ’s filter…
D’oh.
I just realized I quoted the OP which contained slurs…
Holy shit, NOTHING has changed in a hundred years!
If you want more examples, try here or here.
Holy shit, that Lion IRC asshole is still here? I thought he was permabanned years ago.
Wasn’t the word “feminazi” coined by Rush Limbaugh or some similar extreme-right loudmouth ? Who in their right mind would think of using it — let alone actually use it ?
stanton @ 87,
You didn’t actually read Andrea Dworkin, did you? I suggest you do. The you can move on to Shulamith Firestone. Both could be quite scary in their thinking and the way it was expressed. Guess what – it was deliberate, designed to activate those brain cells which are not often enough used.
As they are both dead you’re perfectly safe but alive neither would have met the basic entry requirements for this troop of Imaginary Feminazis you keep in your head.
Public Health Warning: stray phrases picked up in the street can be as dangerous as stray viruses, with the added disadvantage that they raise the question of whether you’re a prat. Or not.
Also, yes, there are rabid anti-male sexists. Let me think of some names. Hmmm… Well, I don’t see lots of them, actually. Ah, I can name Valerie Solanas. But wasn’t she kind of a mental case ? The media always ramble on about “the war of the sexes”, but I can’t think of a single person actually advocating it. That species must be extinct.
Well of course there are rabid anti-male sexists. They have names and nyms like Vox Day, Thunderf00t and the like … and they hang out at places like AVfM. They think men are awful creatures – untrustworthy, vicious, dangerous, brutish, completely ruled by hormonal urges! I don’t know why they hate men so much, and why they spread such ugly lies about them. It’s incredibly destructive, not to mention terribly sad!
As a fat feminist who wears fabulous cat eye glasses and a technicolor Pompadour, I find these cartoons hilarious.
Well, hilariously bad and telling of how untalented, unfunny and hopelessly, cluelessly, awful misogynist douchebros are.
Shake in your shoes, douchebros.
I hope I haunt your nightmares.
MUUUhahahahahaa!
Long time lurker, decided to register just to say that I love the concept of the SQW and SRW! Really hopes that it takes off. There have been some creative suggestions to replace the “Warrior”. I personally think that “Wharrgarbl” would be most fitting. Social Regressive Wharrgarbler has a nice ring to it.
I always thought that ‘feminazis’ were blonde, with severe hairstyles, married to those nice boys from the Waffen-Schutzstaffel, and having lots of nice Aryan babies… am I wrong?
Richardelguru,
Correct. Pleasing Aryan boners and having Aryan babies was all Nazis thought women were good for.
Nazis also hated social justice from minority rights to unions.
Sound familiar?
If words don’t mean anything, then why are they bothering? Why are they wasting their time?
(and what is it that has them so upset, then?)
Dude, didn’t anyone tell you underwater levels fucking suck? What kind of “gamer” are you if you didn’t know that?
I always assumed she was Armenian since her name sounds like it could fit easily into the System of a Down roster (Not that it actually mattered). And a Wikipedia search confirms that her parents were Armenian immigrants to Canada.
Armenia is a predominantly Christian country, and has been so for so long, that the Armenian Christians have their own sections of Jerusalem and the Sepulcher. The antisemitism is not just in the gross cartoon, but also in the assumption that someone who disagrees with you is Jewish.
I couldn’t help noticing that all these definitons of Feminists and Feminazis are all slim, conventionally pretty White women. That’s discrimin..discrimina, uhmm RACISM! As a WoC, I DEMAND to be a part of this conversa..
Oh, I’m not White and slim, so by definiton I am a Feminazi.
Well, never mind then. Carry on!
I hate seeing people like this allow people to try to embarrass everyone who might have some problem with tactics of some “SJW”s of their media attacks. But really anyone has yet to prove that this is more representative than those who say all Gamergaters deserve to die. Anyway, Gamergaters are making it easy with their spurious and empty claims. It’s become a toilet bowl all around. The real culture wars remain waiting to be fought.
Words don’t have consequences? “Only actions matter” makes it sound as if: “what me? No, I have not done anything. I won’t kill anyone. Why blame me?” Words are relevant to ideas and attitudes. Everything that motivates you, everything that informs your decisions, and everything that shapes your reactions, are based on attitudes and ideas. I hate it that there are people who appear committed to desensitizing everyone else to words like c*nt and rape. They can get away with it too, especially if they are popular because of their unreserved demeanor.
Knows what rape is? Apparently feminazi is MRA speak for somebody who won’t let you get away with fucking unconscious people. I imagine them yelling “I was just plying her with alcohol to get down her pants…and I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren’t for you meddling feminazis!!!!” like a fucking Scooby Doo villain.
Stanton@87
OMG! And I bet you love black people but hate n*****s, amiright? Because you’re playing the same game with different characters.
This has already been well fleeced (my irony meter vaporized into nothingness), but if “Words don’t mean a fucking thing” then I guess we can just repeal that first amendment then. On a more esoteric note, since when did vibrating your vocal cords at varying frequencies and durations and/or striking keys on a keyboard and clicking a mouse become classified as non-action?
brianpansky @4:
This may have been addressed upthread but, in a word, “No” answers your question.
(Here’s hoping this gets through)
I can think of only one who might fit their Feminazi caricature, and that’s witchwind, whom PZ has highlighted in the past, and who has indeed written that all P-in-V sex, including consensual, is rape.
But I would not be surprised to find that even witchwind doesn’t fit the definition highlighted in these fucking terrible cartoons.
Also, I kinda like Status Quo Warmongers… but how about Status Quo Defenders? Go ahead… think about it for a minute, especially how that turns out in shorthand… :D
Erm… nevermind. SQD doesn’t work at all with what I was going for. So yeah… back to SQW…
@NateHevens, repeating stanton @87: Can you please avoid using the phrase ” all sex, including consensual sex, is rape”? Because it implies that there might be some non-consensual sex might not be rape. Which is not true. You can just say “They* think all consensual sex is rape” or just “They think all PIV sex is rape.” All non-consensual sex, of whatever form, is already rape.
*Whoever “they” happen to be today. I know I remember hearing that there were some feminists who thought all penetrative sex of whatever form held implicit imbalances and therefore could not be completely consensual. Or that all sex between men and women, in our current oppressive patriarchal society, holds too much of a power imbalance to be consensual. But I’ve never read anything to that effect myself.
Daz @108
No, no, no! It has to be Christopher Lee to be the real Prince of Darkness. Beware of imitations!
emos @124
It does indeed!
I did not mean to make that implication, hyrax. I apologize.
In terms of those people who say all PIV sex is rape, search Freethought Blogs for “Witchwind”.
To expand on my apology… I won’t make such statements again. It was never my intent to make that implication, but of course intent isn’t magic. So I am sorry.
hyrax #138:
This may shed some light on the subject. While I’ve no doubt that there exist a very few extremists who may say such things, in general it turns out the source is a misreading (deliberate or otherwise—take your pick).
2kittehs #139:
What? No, it doesn’t.
It really does not imply anything of the kind.
(This is not a point of intent, it’s about reading comprehension.)
Chas #143
I’m thinking of going down to the local for a pint.
My shout.
Daz @142, you are correct, I’ve never ridden such a motorbike! Or any other, for that matter. Pedestrian, I iz.
Now I’m thinking, Christopher Lee on a motorbike … Ooooh …
You know I just got a response from someone who posted the word “Feminazi” on the PZ Myers atheismTV profile.
He was confused as to why I compared him to Rush Limbaugh, so I explained to this self described “liberal atheist” that the plausible founder of conservative talk radio coined the term when I was 3 years old, and that google was a thing.
I admit I’m something of a troll, to other trolls, but snide remarks and one liners made at the expense of people who say such abominable things, I often find that I simply can’t help myself. Plus injecting cognitive dissonance by forcing the comparison between self professed rationalists and Rush Limbaugh can’t hurt…
In any case I’ve been called a feminazi before, I’ve also been called a regular nazi, a communist, a racist, a self hating reverse racist, and pretty much any combination of self contradicting political slurs you can come up with. Some more deserved than others, after all the way sexists define feminazi, I’m certainly qualified. Though I lack the apparent physical features associated with the stereotype. My sizable nose, glasses, and menacingly wringed hands notwithstanding.
GaiusIuliusTabernarius
What the fuck do you want?
Manipulative liar.
Chas at #143 is correct.
Which doesn’t change the fact that it’s a bad idea for him to come anywhere near a thread like this.
Minor points like this can get worked out on their own, Chas. No need for you to risk bringing your gasoline-drenched attitude near any smoldering threads about feminism.
re: my 138, I suppose “implies” is too strong a word. But I do think the phrasing is potentially misleading, especially if the person reading it doesn’t have a strong understanding of the concept that “all non-consensual sex = rape.” (Hopefully most of the readers here get that already, but still.)
stanton @87:
To add on to Maureen Brian @121, I present this
and this
which were the first and third Google result when searching “dworkin consensual sex is rape.” Boring, long-debunked talking point is boring and long-debunked.
chigau (違う) what do I want?
Uh… well I did want to share what I considered an amusing anecdote that coincided with my joining this website last night. I saw this thread and I posted my experience.
Perhaps a bit of laughter? Nothing beyond that, I don’t really understand the meaning behind that question.
@ 151,
Thanks, HJ! To be honest I didn’t even think to add MacKinnon to stanton’s Essential Reading List. Perhaps because I find her slightly hard going and feel a twinge of guilt every time I dust the shelf with the only partly read Towards a Feminist Theory of the State on it.
NB: To newbies and dorks, this is a feminist in-joke. Not a terribly good one but do not be alarmed if it’s meaningless now. Just read until you do get it.