I am a feminist, in the sense that my blood boils whenever someone says that women are not logical, they do not know how to drive, that they should know their place, that they shouldn't rob men of their jobs, that they should shut up and do what they are told. That they are conniving people (paraphrased), that it's their own fault if their spouses are unfaithful. Yes. I have either heard or read these types of misogynist observations. So to be clear I am liberal and I am a feminist.
But to delete a paragraph because its sentiments are not explicitly liberal, or apparently anti-feminist is censorship.
The answer was mocking extreme feminism. The answer was using humour to mock feminists who will never defend men, and who do take their beliefs to extreme.
peufeu is entitled to use SATIRE to put across his point, it was not hate speech. Deleting the paragraph, the funniest paragraph too, is saying "Conform or else". Was it a rant? NO. It was using humour to put across a specific point, and it was effective.
Oh ny the way, I didn't upvote because I found the 2nd link, an image, to be distatseful. Not offensive just unnecessary, and bordering on NSFW but that was my opinion. And I've learned that opinions in comments are immediately deleted. Hence the chat
@Mari-LouA Yeah, I agree with you on basically everything. I think the root issue is that the word "feminism" has so many meanings depending who you ask. For example, my point of view is that everyone should have equal rights (which we pretty much have already in western civilization but not everywhere on earth) and thus both women and men should be able to do whatever they want.
So I'd be in Hoff-Summers' camp, like equity or equal rights feminism, although I think it's silly to call this feminism, since it's more like common sense.
(although I would add a caveat: can do the same job as long as they pass the same standards, if we consider firemen that would be something like carry a wounded person or bust a door with an axe, which does exclude more women than men, but it's a requirement for the job...)
However... the modern third-wave feminists are different: they think women should do what feminists want (and if you're a woman and you disagree, they'll accuse you of internalized misogyny or something). So they are a sad joke. This is why I put a picture of girls in pussy costumes: I find it a perfect symbol for the movement. Wearing that and expecting to be taken seriously is... well, kinda preposterous ;)
Physical strength is one thing, but courage and the ability to save lives, and that includes children, is another. But definitely, I would think physical strength is an attribute in firefighting. The story is completely different in the field of science though.
...which is why they should be ridiculed. Besides, they don't need my help to look silly. Sad thing is they're doing their best to convince people that women are in fact silly creatures... On the contrary, my dentist is a woman and she's very competent. So she proves everyone that there's no reason a woman can't be a competent dentist... she doesn't need slogans or anything, she leads by example, so to speak!
I agree for science, we need more Dorothy Crowfoot Hodgkin ;)
Now, you're beginning to sound dangerously patronising. "Look! I'm not sexist, I even have a competent dentist who happens to be a woman who knows how to look after my teeth." There's nothing remarkable about that. I am talking about science, and maths, and engineering. I know you are right-wing, and that's fine. We need diversity and differences of opinion in order to make a better world. But what we (women) don't need is insincerity or glib examples.
I liked your answer, I laughed. It was thought provoking and ironic. The second link, I maintain, was distasteful. In fact, you didn't post the image. You "knew" it had a shock value, but you must be aware that NOT everyone who uses this site is western, many have strong religious beliefs and convictions, and seeing a similar image of woman dressing up vaginas, even in fun, would be highly offensive in their eyes.
Hmmm, not patronizing, i should explain better. I think that the best way to prove that women can be excellent in STEM, medical etc is... to have women excel in those fields! I used the dentist as an example. I'm really not bragging about having a woman dentist therefore "not sexist" ;) I've been to engineering school, there were like 5% girls but they were very good. Wished there were more. No affirmative action, of course, they passed the entrance exam like everyone else.
"You knew it had a shock value" : of course, I found it both hilarious and mildly offensive, a perfect illustration of the type of feminists I was talking about. I mean, no-one forced these girls to wear these costumes, take a picture and put it online ;) "many have strong religious beliefs and convictions, and seeing a similar image of woman dressing up vaginas" : I don't give a damn about offending people who choose to be offended, sorry ;)
@peufeu Different people have different sensibilities, and someone who clicked on the second link would not have known what is was. OTH I really liked the "equity" wikipedia link. It was interesting to read.
It's your prerogative to say you give a damn about offending people, but I don't think you will win consensus. The image was risqué, bordering on NSFW...I am more disturbed that chunks were cut out from your answer, parts that were not offensive, but expressing a difference of opinion (from the norm) by using humor. There has to be a balance.
@Mari-LouA I know you and I have very different opinions on how SE works, but I'm going to reply anyway. This user has a history of deliberately trolling people, particularly by incorporating anti-feminist rants into his answers. Keep in mind the context of the image (which was absolutely NSFW... Not borderline at all, which presented it as if that was the definition of third wave feminism.
The parts I removed I removed because they violated our "be nice" policy. Not because they were "not explicitly liberal" (which is a massive strawman, BTW), or because they were critical of feminism.
It was because they were deliberately insulting to anyone who identifies as third-wave feminists.
Note that opinions on political issues are not appropriate here, and meta discussion has indicated that the appropriate action is to edit to remove language stating a political opinion (such as third wave feminists consider lecturing people a hobby).
As for your concerns on censorship: the idea that any censorship is inherently bad is ridiculous. Someone posting spam gets censored. Do you object to that? If someone posts a bunch of racist insults, that would get censored. Do you object to that?
If the answer to any of those questions is "yes", then perhaps the SE platform simply isn't right for you.
If you disagree with my edits, feel free to take it to meta.
Now, @Beofett, about the image being NSFW, here it would not, but maybe for you it is, can't argue with your perception. As for censorship and moderation, it is required, pretty much any community that refuses to moderate risks slowly turning into a cesspit (as an example, I heard that Gab is succumbing to a terminal neo-nazi infestation precisely because the owner's attitude is "any censorship is inherently bad"...)
However, since you mention I was "deliberately insulting to anyone who identifies as third-wave feminist" I would like to know your opinion on the following statement: "I identify as someone who finds third-wave feminism offensive." Thoughts?
@peufeu when deciding if something is NSFW in a public forum, you should always respect the lowest common denominator; i.e. even if it is acceptable at your work, you need to consider if a much more restrictive work environment would find it objectionable. I'm sure there are companies where nudity is acceptable (porn employs lots of people, for example). That doesn't mean it's reasonable to argue that posting pictures of naked people isn't violating a "no NSFW" rule on a public forum.
It was an example. People dressed in costumes representing genitalia would be classified as "close enough" to nudity in more prudish work environments, however, and in the US many employers take a stance of erring on the side of "we don't want to risk getting sued"
Discussion on answer by peufeu: Are f…
Discussion on answer by peufeu: Are f…