Most bigoted sentence of the day goes to:
Nazism, the belief that whites are people.
The black panther party, the belief that blacks are people.
The westboro church, the belief that Christians are people.
I can fucking play this game too.Where’sfallacyalertwhen you need them?
The asker gives a perfect example of the black and white fallacy, and durkin62 responds with false analogy and Godwin’s Law. As crazy as 3rd-wave feminism can get, you should still think twice before comparing it to Nazis.
Lets make some comparisons shall we?
- discriminated against individuals on the basis of their genetic code
- promoted the view that the targeted group was inferior genetically and behaviourally
- promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being labelled as ‘parasites’
- promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being constantly ridiculed
- promoted propaganda that led to the targeted group being laughed at even when mutilated
- demonised the target group by labelling them as perverts and sexual criminals
- sought to break the target group away from their families
- promoted the view that the targeted group was responsible for most of the major ills in society
- disseminated lies and disinformation about the targeted group in order to further promote their own ideology
- disseminated lies and disinformation about historical matters
- used intimidation, threats and coercion to prevent their opponents from speaking out
- promoted the lie that the privileged group consisted of innocent ‘victims’ of the targeted group
- demanded special privileges in the workplace for members of the privileged group e.g. preferential job placements for women
- discriminated against the targeted group in educational matters and in the workplace
- perverted the justice system so that members of the targeted group were easily discriminated against in the law e.g. in family courts
- arranged matters so that accusers from the privileged group could be shielded by anonymity in the courtroom e.g. in sex-assault cases.
- arranged matters so that defendants from the targeted group had to ‘prove’ their innocence e.g. in sex-assault and domestic violence cases
- arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define what, legally, was to be deemed ‘a crime’, e.g. where nowadays the ‘feelings’ of women rather than the behaviours of men are the determinants of what constitutes ‘a crime’
- arranged matters so that members of the privileged group could capriciously define how the law was to view certain matters e.g. a fetus inside a woman can now be deemed by her - at her whim - to be a worthless piece of tissue or a prospective baby - with all the ramifications of this - regardless of how the father might feel about it all (also sexual harassment, etc.)
- arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group more severely than members of the privileged group for the very same crime e.g. in domestic violence and murder cases.
- arranged matters so that members of the targeted group were made responsible for the choices and behaviours of members of the privileged group e.g. in paternity fraud cases where duped fathers still have to pay child support
- arranged matters so that members of the privileged group who harmed, or even murdered, members of the targeted group were shown undue leniency - and were often actually applauded for their actions
- arranged matters so that the law punished members of the targeted group severely for even trivial offences, e.g. domestic violence, sexual harassment
- arranged matters so that members of the privileged group earned a right to the property of members of the targeted group for no other reason than that they were members of the privileged group e.g. alimony, child custody.
- arranged matters so that certain speech or attitudes directed against the privileged group were criminalised e.g. biased ‘hate speech’ laws.
- punished those who protested against the prevailing ideology; e.g. for being politically-incorrect.
- effectively controlled the mainstream media and the academic institutions and arranged for them to present a dishonest and dishonourable point of view in support of their ideology
- consistently highlighted and exaggerated the achievements and the suffering of the privileged group while downplaying the achievements and the suffering of the targeted group
- ran government-funded educational courses in universities (e.g. Women’s Studies, Title IX) and in schools to promote the privileged group at the expense of the targeted group.
- persisted in a long term campaign of hatred toward the targeted group, e.g. “A women needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.” “Men think about sex every 15 seconds.”
But you know what? None of that even matters, because the entire point of my fucking statement was that you don’t get to claim that just because a group is supposedly working for the benefit of a certain demographic, being against the group is against the demographic. So yes, in fucking fact my comparison between those two groups is in fact accurate, so you can take your false false analogy and cram it right back up your ass.
-Mod WillHold it.durkin62, I was not refuting your claim. You actually did make a good point. That’s not what my reblog was about - it was about how you made your claim, which was rather dishonest. Call me back when feminists have killed over 60,000,000 people. - Admin Stavrogin
Do you not know what context is?
“you don’t get to claim that just because a group is supposedly working for the benefit of a certain demographic, being against the group is against the demographic.”
The two groups don’t have to be identical, they just have to fit my criteria above for the comparisons to work. And both the Nazi political party and feminism are guilty of trying to uplift their own demographic at the expense of others.
And there was a Nazi party before the whole mass genocide thing, take a good look at all those comparisons I made up there, that’s what the Nazi regime was doing prior to all that. So to borrow from your own blogs theme here. You’re choosing one difference between the two groups that’s completely irrelevant to my point
Claiming the two are not comparable in the context of my argument because that one difference means their entirely different.
Because one is obviously worse than the other.
Had we recognized the toxicity of such a mentality before shit went down perhaps we could have done a better job preventing it. Now you’re telling me we can’t draw parallels until after people start getting massacred? Because not like feminists are completely above the idea.
"Life in this society being, at best, an utter bore and no aspect of society being at all relevant to women, there remains to civic-minded, responsible, thrill-seeking females only to overthrow the government, eliminate the money system, institute complete automation, and destroy the male sex."
~Valerie Solanas, the SCUM Manifesto
"The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it"
~Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, in Women and the New Rage, p.67
“I feel that ‘man-hating’ is an honourable and viable political act, that the oppressed have a right to class-hatred against the class that is oppressing them.”
~Robin Morgan, Ms. Magazine Editor
“To call a man an animal is to flatter him; he’s a machine, a walking dildo.”
“I want to see a man beaten to a bloody pulp with a high-heel shoved in his mouth, like an apple in the mouth of a pig.”
“The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men.”
“The proportion of men must be reduced to and maintained at approximately 10% of the human race.”
~Sally Miller Gearhart
"Who cares how men feel or what they do or whether they suffer? They have had over 2000 years to dominate and made a complete hash of it. Now it is our turn. My only comment to men is, if you don’t like it, bad luck - and if you get in my way I’ll run you down."
~Signed: Liberated Women, Boronia. (Herald-Sun, Melbourne, Australia - 9 February 1996)
"My feelings about men are the result of my experience. I have little sympathy for them. Like a Jew just released from Dachau, I watch the handsome young Nazi soldier fall writhing to the ground with a bullet in his stomach and I look briefly and walk on. I don’t even need to shrug. I simply don’t care. What he was, as a person, I mean, what his shames and yearnings were, simply don’t matter."
~Marilyn French; The Woman’s Room.
"All men are good for is fucking, and running over with a truck".
~Statement made by A University of Maine Feminist Administrator, quoted by Richard Dinsmore, who brought a successful civil suit against the University in the amount of $600,000. Richard had protested the quote; was dismissed thereafter on the grounds of harassment; and responded by bringing suit against the University. 1995 settlement.
So I suggest you put your personal feelings aside and live up to your URL.
To quote myself from earlier: “I can understand where the argument comes from … Even if they are prevalent in the movement, I don’t think that they’ll ever get enough power to do that, especially since feminism’s popularity (and therefore influence) is waning. Radical feminists enacting a second Holocaust is nothing to worry about, and therefore the comparision just makes you look like you’re just grabbing for attention. It’s a bit dishonest, really.”
Regardless, you do still in fact have a point. I’ll be bowing out of the debate now with one last word of advice, phrased in the form of a question:
Do you really think feminists are going to listen to you like this?
- Admin Stavrogin
Well its a good thing I wasn’t making a claim they were gonna start a freaking holocaust then huh? Just that a group isn’t synonymous with the demographic they represent, that is fucking all. Obviously I’m going to pick organizations that feminists don’t think are moral to drive the point home, and hey, look at that nifty long ass list of comparisons I had there. Can you make a list making a better comparison of something else to feminism? Because once gain, aside from the genocide, the resemblances are uncanny.
“ Do you really think feminists are going to listen to you like this ”
You mean my turning their own logic and applying to things they don’t support, to show how their logic is flawed? All the while making a comprehensive list to show the similarities between their own ideology and one they hate, with a list of quotes of their leaders basically supporting a genocide? But the mannerism may push people away from my message? Here’s my response to your advice.
“why would I care about the opinions of people who value the preservation of their feelings over facts?”
Maybe some fucking shame will do them good and have them question an ideology before blindly supporting it next time. But I’m not wasting my time trying to coddle the emotions of people. They’ll just jump right back on the next feel good ideology bandwagon. I’m no activist, I’m no recruiter for an political campaign. I saw the person in the Ask there making a dumbass statement and I called their bullshit. You not liking the comparison, or their getting butthurt by it doesn’t make it any less valid. Making a statement as fucking dumb as that ask deserves getting backlash.
“why would I care about the opinions of people who value the preservation of their feelings over facts?”
maybe because that’s the only way theyll fuckin LISTEN to you numbnuts
you dont want to change shit. you want to look cool and edgy. look at me, i dont support feminism!! yay, good for you.
anybody whos been on the internet for longer than thirty seconds stops reading a debate the second someone brings up nazis. youre not accomplishing anything. youre banging on the outside of an echochamber. you need to work your way into their minds, first, not just flail about drawing sensationalistic comparisions
yes, the asker is an ass. that doesnt mean you get to be one, too.
I have no interest in coddling them, I specified that already. If that’s what they need to sway their minds then they can stay with feminism, they’ll get it there.
This wasn’t a fucking debate until you all turned it into one. This was a dumbass person using a fucked up line of reasoning and I turned it on their head. Pretty common tactic.
But you all wanted to take what was basically a tongue in cheek response on how dumb this bullshit was, and drag it the fuck out. Which BTW I’ve yet to hear shit from any of you as to why anything I said it’s wrong. Just “you can’t do that cus feelz”
For clarification, since you all seem to think I’m just here to shit on feminism and nothing else. What I give a fuck about is people using this bullshit emotional reasoning that I’m mocking. When you rely on emotional responses, you make bad decisions. I want people to stop being so overly emotional, and you certainly don’t achieve that by coddling their emotions.
Tough love. You say some dumb shit, you get flak for it. You learn not to say dumb shit in the future. No consequences = idiots learning no lesson.
coddling schmoddling. stop shitting on the memories of 71,000,000 people because “wah wah one person is an idiot”
also for you precious list of comparisions - you ever see those macros “explaining” how harry potter and star wars have the same storyline? yeah guess what you sound like.
and are you seriously fucking telling me you compared feminism to nazism and expected not to get into a debate. is that what youre telling me. are you fucking serious.