Hate speech and radical feminism- should it be banned

[Bubbles]

I came across this claim that a journalist ( Julie Bindle ) claimed that all men should be shut away in camps with wardens and not allowed out.

I have been trying to get of the truth of the matter.

It seems to me, radical feminists are a poisonous bunch and we should be treating them the same way as we would the kkk or Nazis.

I'm still looking at it, but what I've seen so far is pretty awful.

As a woman they horrify me, I don't know about men.

I can see why they are given no platforming status

http://www.radfemcollective.org/no-platforming/

This one discusses how Julie Bindle has supposedly said all men should be put into concentration camps.

http://youtu.be/Y1JQUG7doCE

[Khatru]

Even the Bible talks about all unbelievers being cast into a lake of fire.

Something which many believers gleefully accept as truth.

Over in America they have Christian hate speech as spouted by the Westboro Baptist Church with their "God Hates Fags" campaigns.

In the UK we seem to see more hatred from minority groups of fundie Islamists.

Despite that, I'm a supporter of free speech.  As twisted and hurtful as it may be, I feel we need to allow it.
After all, it does help us identify these idiots and thereby prepare for them.

Of course, if they start breaking the overarching law of the land it becomes a different matter.

[Bubbles]

I also don't get the term political lesbian

Political lesbianism is the idea that women may choose to become lesbians, and should do so. It is epitomized in a phrase usually attributed to author Ti-Grace Atkinson: "Feminism is the theory; lesbianism is the practice."

So do gay men choose to be gay?
Or is it just these women are so twisted they assume they can tell other women  what to be?
How dare they say what I should be? 

A woman being accepted as a lesbian is one thing, telling all women they should be one is quite another!

I think they are as oppresive,  in their own way ,if not more so.

Feminism doesn't mean this to me, and this isn't liberation.

This is something nasty IMO .


Something that regards how I feel I am, as dirty, something to be denied.

It disrespects me as a woman by telling me, I should be a lesbian!

Seriously, it's as bad as telling me I should be a prostitute, and just as manipulative!
 

[Brownie]

I don't believe anyone, male or female, chooses to be gay. 
During the 1980s it was quite popular - fashionable - for lesbians to 'hate men' and deride them generally.  They also wore quite distinctive clothing, eg primary colours and Dr Marten boots.  That died out.  One gay activist said it wasn't fair to the good guys and it wasn't (not the clothes, the speech and attitude).

Everything has improved for gays and is still improving.  Society is fairer and people generally, more tolerant.  There's still a way to go but we're getting there fast.  It's a shame to hear about any woman who is so anti-man.  I like men (even married one :-), and so do most women.

[Rhiannon]

There was a great article I read a few years ago by a feminist journalist who did indeed decide to only have lesbian relationships as a result of her feminist principles. Eventually she fell in love with and married a bloke, and was voted 'Most Disappointing Lesbian of the Year' as a consequence. 

[Bubbles]

I don't believe anyone, male or female, chooses to be gay. 
During the 1980s it was quite popular - fashionable - for lesbians to 'hate men' and deride them generally.  They also wore quite distinctive clothing, eg primary colours and Dr Marten boots.  That died out.  One gay activist said it wasn't fair to the good guys and it wasn't (not the clothes, the speech and attitude).

Everything has improved for gays and is still improving.  Society is fairer and people generally, more tolerant.  There's still a way to go but we're getting there fast.  It's a shame to hear about any woman who is so anti-man.  I like men (even married one :-), and so do most women.

Strangely they seem to think you arn't born that way.

Alison Garthwaite was another of the authors, and she stands by the original argument. "Sexuality is not determined by a gene which we are born with," she says. "It can change over time, and is determined by both your circumstances and the choices you make.

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/jan/30/women-gayrights

[Shaker]

Swivel-eyed fruitloops such as Bindel do more to set back the fine cause of feminism more than any man - she used to write (I use the word loosely) for the Guardian and her pieces really were the sorriest lot of unmitigated balls I've been unfortunate enough to witness in a very long time, consistently attracting nigh-universal opprobrium.

Some people don't realise when they're their own worst enemy and actively but unwittingly damage the cause they claim to espouse.

For myself, I'm a strong supporter of the women's movement - I hate it when they just lie there.

Here all week, folks

[Aruntraveller]

It disrespects me as a woman by telling me, I should be a lesbian!

As the old poor play on words would have it - what's wrong with being an actor? 

Julie Bindel's a nut job - simple as.

I had the displeasure of seeing her speak a few years ago - and it was the same old rant - men are idiots or murderers (depending on the nuance she was expressing ) and women are superheroines who can do no wrong. She was, of course, wrong then and she is wrong now.

I was there with several lesbians I have known for years and they decided to leave the meeting early and go the pub as the woman was talking s**t. Their words and decision - I as a nasty dominant male meekly agreed with going to the pub 

[Rhiannon]

Strangely they seem to think you arn't born that way.

There are women who choose (temporarily or permanently) to have relationships with other women as a result of needing to feel safe, which they don't with men due to a history of abuse of one kind or another.

[Bubbles]

There was a great article I read a few years ago by a feminist journalist who did indeed decide to only have lesbian relationships as a result of her feminist principles. Eventually she fell in love with and married a bloke, and was voted 'Most Disappointing Lesbian of the Year' as a consequence. 

 

Yes at the end of the day, people have to be who they really are.

I'd rather people were free to find out who they are and not be discriminated against , rather than try and be someone else, to suit someone else.

[ippy]

I came across this claim that a journalist ( Julie Bindle ) claimed that all men should be shut away in camps with wardens and not allowed out.

I have been trying to get of the truth of the matter.

It seems to me, radical feminists are a poisonous bunch and we should be treating them the same way as we would the kkk or Nazis.

I'm still looking at it, but what I've seen so far is pretty awful.

As a woman they horrify me, I don't know about men.

I can see why they are given no platforming status

http://www.radfemcollective.org/no-platforming/

This one discusses how Julie Bindle has supposedly said all men should be put into concentration camps.

http://youtu.be/Y1JQUG7doCE

Just wondered Rose, would any of these, presuably women warders be dominating in any way?

ippy

[Bubbles]

Swivel-eyed fruitloops such as Bindel do more to set back the fine cause of feminism more than any man - she used to write (I use the word loosely) for the Guardian and her pieces really were the sorriest lot of unmitigated balls I've been unfortunate enough to witness in a very long time, consistently attracting nigh-universal opprobrium.

Some people don't realise when they're their own worst enemy and actively but unwittingly damage the cause they claim to espouse.

For myself, I'm a strong supporter of the women's movement - I hate it when they just lie there.

Here all week, folks

 

[Bubbles]

Just wondered Rose, would any of these, presuably women warders be dominating in any way?

ippy

Now behave, Ippy 

[Bubbles]

As the old poor play on words would have it - what's wrong with being an actor? 

Julie Bindel's a nut job - simple as.

I had the displeasure of seeing her speak a few years ago - and it was the same old rant - men are idiots or murderers (depending on the nuance she was expressing ) and women are superheroines who can do no wrong. She was, of course, wrong then and she is wrong now.

I was there with several lesbians I have known for years and they decided to leave the meeting early and go the pub as the woman was talking s**t. Their words and decision - I as a nasty dominant male meekly agreed with going to the pub 

There is accepting people as they come regardless of sexuality, and then there is the sort of thing this woman is expressing, which IMO is near enough the exact opposite.

How can she not see it? Equality and freedom isn't about shutting men in concentration camps and suggesting women change their sexuality.

It's about accepting and enabling different choices.

Society accepting men staying home to help raise the children, if that is what the couple want.

Of gay men and women's relationships being recognised as valid, and their rights about raising children.

It's about opportunities, not confining half the population to camps because they were born with one set of genitals.

 

 

[Brownie]

Rose: 'It's about opportunities, not confining half the population to camps because they were born with one set of genitals.''

Blimey Rose, I only have one set of genitals!  Does that mean I have narrowly escaped being confined to a camp?

[Rhiannon]

There is accepting people as they come regardless of sexuality, and then there is the sort of thing this woman is expressing, which IMO is near enough the exact opposite.

How can she not see it? Equality and freedom isn't about shutting men in concentration camps and suggesting women change their sexuality.

It's about accepting and enabling different choices.

Society accepting men staying home to help raise the children, if that is what the couple want.

Of gay men and women's relationships being recognised as valid, and their rights about raising children.

It's about opportunities, not confining half the population to camps because they were born with one set of genitals.

 

 

The woman's a loon, Rose. Expecting her to 'see' anything is like expecting the people at Westboro to see that gay is normal.

[Bubbles]

Rose: 'It's about opportunities, not confining half the population to camps because they were born with one set of genitals.''

Blimey Rose, I only have one set of genitals!  Does that mean I have narrowly escaped being confined to a camp?

whoops! Should have proof read that.

LOL 

[Brownie]

There are women who choose (temporarily or permanently) to have relationships with other women as a result of needing to feel safe, which they don't with men due to a history of abuse of one kind or another.

Relationships, yes, but sexual relationships?  I'd have thought that took sexual chemistry, not just friendship.

Women can and do abuse other women in relationships too.  I've known a couple of girls - lesbians - who were completely messed up by women with whom they'd been involved.

(Rose:  No proof necessary, you have my word )

[Rhiannon]

Relationships, yes, but sexual relationships?  I'd have thought that took sexual chemistry, not just friendship.

Women can and do abuse other women in relationships too.  I've known a couple of girls - lesbians - who were completely messed up by women with whom they'd been involved.

(Rose:  No proof necessary, you have my word )

Of course women can be abusive, very; and not just to other women either, sadly. 

But yes, I've known women who have chosen a relationship with another woman - in her book Kissing the Hag Emma Restall Orr quotes one woman saying that it was like having a love affair with herself.

[Nearly Sane]

I think we seek to sanitise our sexual urges by talking about chemistry as if there is some great limit. Most people, leaving aside general taboos, would enjoy sex with most people, and many other things.

While we generally attribute the almost non discriminatory sex habit to men, best epitomised by the line in Buffy from Xander 'I'm a 17 year old boy, linoleum makes me think of sex', enjoying sexual acts isn't that difficult and the birds and flowers stuff is just a societal layer. I suggest one thing that can make sex enjoyable is being comfortable wi the other person. We build too much idea of danger into it because we think of that first rush, and I think societally tend to fetishize danger, but sometimes an orgasm is just an orgasm.

[Rhiannon]

Yes, I think sexuality is far more fluid than society likes to pretend is the case. And there isn't the same social stigma attached (at least by some people) to two women having an affair that there is for two men.

The notion that danger and sexual attraction go together is a pretty nasty one actually. It allows people to justify all kinds of attitudes and actions.

[Nearly Sane]

I should explain that I don't think all sex in early relationships is necessarily seen as dangerous but the idea of chemistry is all haunted by madness, whereas for most of my sexual activity it has been much more about a simple pleasure. If you can look on sex in that way, it isn't a problem in circumstances yp wouldn't expect, but as always there is our 'my children must survive' lizard brain drive that gets in the way.

[Rhiannon]

Thinking back to the OP, is 'radical' a misused term now? It is used for 'fanatic' and generally represents not only extreme views, but an aggressive and obsessive way of acting on them.

Yet 'radical' has previously meant something new and fresh, a departure from strongly held norms, not an adherence to them. For example, in Christianity 'radicals' have generally referred to the likes of John Shelby Spong, on the very liberal wing, who have rethought a good deal of the belief boxes that Christians should tick. But for all his radical ideas he's no fanatic. Radical Islam on the other hand looks to old ideas and is very conservative and, as we know, violent.

Is this a misuse of language or is it just evolving?

[Shaker]

I suspect it's just the natural evolution of language - even up to the time of WWII the Liberal Party was regarded as the radical party. We already have words for fanatic, zealot and fundamentalist; I would hate to see a fine descriptor such as radical become a synonym for them. To me radical is a term of praise - Spong et. al. as you say - and not abuse.

[Rhiannon]

I suspect it's just the natural evolution of language - even up to the time of WWII the Liberal Party was regarded as the radical party. We already have words for fanatic, zealot and fundamentalist; I would hate to see a fine descriptor such as radical become a synonym for them.

I agree completely, yet I fear this is where we are heading.