Feminist professor’s hate speech op-ed

[Common]

Feminist professor’s hate speech op-ed reveals what modern day feminism is really about

THis is the classic description of a feminazi and no I dont care if you hate me, not even a little bit

Feminist academics have found a new spokesperson for their radical ideology in Suzanna Danuta Watters, a sociology professor at Northeastern University who recently published an op-ed in the Washington Post titled, “Why can’t we hate men?”

In the op-ed, she answers her own question by asserting that it is rational to hate all men on the basis of the laundry list of claims, ranging from general sexual violence perpetrated against women by men, to their underrepresentation in a variety of fields. Watters claims that all men are guilty of the sin of misogyny and have played an active part in enforcing these disparities. Why? Because men hold positions of power and have not yet rectified these inequalities.

She insists that if men don’t want to be hated by women, they should “lean out so we can actually just stand up without being beaten down.” That really means, “Pledge to vote for feminist women only. Don’t run for office. Don’t be in charge of anything. Step away from the power.”


But Watters can’t be right. Is this really feminism? Her opinions certainly don’t fit in with what we’re told about feminism in our American History classes. Where did feminism go wrong?

First- and second-wave feminism, the feminism of Susan B. Anthony, fought for equality in the workplace. It was about choice, and by extension, freedom. Freedom to decide to vote – for either progressive Democrats or conservative Republicans. Freedom to decide to take on a professional career – or be a stay-at-home mom.

But modern day feminism, the feminism of Watters, isn’t about choice – it’s about power. Modern day feminists want to exercise power over women and men. They want to tell women and men which life choices to make.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/r...s-really-about

[Chris]

This has been the approach of the left for some time, just more subtle. The demand to be fair, for equal time, only to condemn others morally, or, better, moralizingly. Reason is not employed to be right; incosistency and conradiction are embraced and consensus sought. And if you don't get along with the consensus view, why, get along or get out.

[Common]

This has been the approach of the left for some time, just more subtle. The demand to be fair, for equal time, only to condemn others morally, or, better, moralizingly. Reason is not employed to be right; incosistency and conradiction are embraced and consensus sought. And if you don't get along with the consensus view, why, get along or get out.

I dont buy into any of that nor do I pay one bit of attention to it.

My entire career I never had any kind of sexual accusations made against me, I have daughters a wife of many decades and I have nothing to be guilty about, especially my having a penis.

[Chris]

I dont buy into any of that nor do I pay one bit of attention to it.

My entire career I never had any kind of sexual accusations made against me, I have daughters a wife of many decades and I have nothing to be guilty about, especially my having a penis.

Wasn't talking about sexual accusations but the left in general. Heck, you see it on the forum all the time. It used to be overbearing but the consensus has largely left the forum by choice or banning.

[Adelaide]

I think what is more dangerous then the very small percentage of women who identify as this type of feminist are the people who try to make that small group seem like the majority. There are still reasonable people, men and women, who identify as feminists and aren't pushing a bat$#@! crazy agenda riddled with hatred for men.

[Common]

I think what is more dangerous then the very small percentage of women who identify as this type of feminist are the people who try to make that small group seem like the majority. There are still reasonable people, men and women, who identify as feminists and aren't pushing a bat$#@! crazy agenda riddled with hatred for men.

Thats true because if most women thought like that, you would rule the universe. Theres not a woman that we know that thinks like including my very liberal daughters.

[Chris]

I think what is more dangerous then the very small percentage of women who identify as this type of feminist are the people who try to make that small group seem like the majority. There are still reasonable people, men and women, who identify as feminists and aren't pushing a bat$#@! crazy agenda riddled with hatred for men.

I'd agree that the number of women, or even men supporting them, who take it to the extreme are few, but to some degree this ideology and rhetoric and attitude pervades the left.

[Adelaide]

I'd agree that the number of women or even men supporting them, who take it to the extreme are few, but to some degree this ideology and rhetoric and attitude pervades the left.

I don't think that I agree.

I honestly can't think of a single person in my real life who believes that feminism is putting women above men and relegating men to a lower status, or going so far as to hate them. It's simply a desire to be on equal footing for the vast majority. That means different things to different people, such as the differing opinions (even among feminists) when it comes to the "pay gap". I think that most people are also cognizant of the fact that women need to earn some of that equality rather than having it handed it to them; for example, being given a promotion because they have the best qualifications... I personally consider it insulting to promote women to just promote women.

I think that maybe the perception by some is skewed and their minds go from "equal footing" to "hates men/want men to fail/feminazi" as a knee-jerk reaction. Instead of "equality" they hear "downgrade status of men." Instead of hearing "empower women to have the tools to succeed," they hear, "emasculate men." It seems like a defensive response to what is (normally) a reasonable issue for most people. Rather than understanding that feminism for most people is simply a desire for a level of equality and an acceptance for some female-specific issues (breastfeeding, for example), there are some people who automatically take those notions as an attack on men.

[Chris]

I don't think that I agree.

I honestly can't think of a single person in my real life who believes that feminism is putting women above men and relegating men to a lower status, or going so far as to hate them. It's simply a desire to be on equal footing for the vast majority. That means different things to different people, such as the differing opinions (even among feminists) when it comes to the "pay gap". I think that most people are also cognizant of the fact that women need to earn some of that equality rather than having it handed it to them; for example, being given a promotion because they have the best qualifications... I personally consider it insulting to promote women to just promote women.

I think that maybe the perception by some is skewed and their minds go from "equal footing" to "hates men/want men to fail/feminazi" as a knee-jerk reaction. Instead of "equality" they hear "downgrade status of men." Instead of hearing "empower women to have the tools to succeed," they hear, "emasculate men." It seems like a defensive response to what is (normally) a reasonable issue for most people. Rather than understanding that feminism for most people is simply a desire for a level of equality and an acceptance for some female-specific issues (breastfeeding, for example), there are some people who automatically take those notions as an attack on men.

Well, I did say those were few, just that that sort of view is to some degree found in most on the left.

It could be that the few are reacting to the impossibility of having both liberty and equality, liberty being the freedom to be an individual, equality the requiment the collective complies with the consensus.

[Adelaide]

Well, I did say those were few, just that that sort of view is to some degree found in most on the left.

It could be that the few are reacting to the impossibility of having both liberty and equality, liberty being the freedom to be an individual, equality the requiment the collective complies with the consensus.

I don't see liberty and equality as being exlusive or seperate. I think that in a truly free society it would happen naturally and organically. But we don't live in a truly free society.