Of course it shouldn't be; and it isn't.
The idea that feminism would be misandrist is as ridiculous as saying that disliking systematic bias against black people makes you anti-white, or disliking systematic bias against the working class makes you anti-middle-class.
There's a lot of debates and arguments and disagreements that're worth having in respect of feminism* - but the basic idea ought to be utterly trivial; the puzzle is why it isn't.
*For example, there's recently been a proposal about a way to combat sexism in philosophy conferences. I have my problems with it; but the basic idea that there's a problem that needs scrutiny and a solution is fair enough. Dealing with questions about what ought to be done seems to me to be an area that'll throw up arguments that're worth having; but an argument about whether or not it's anti-male to do anything at all is not. That's just chaff.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 10:14,
Reply)
I wouldn't say its chaff
The perception that its anti-male creates huge resistance to even the concept of feminism.
I also don't think you can say that feminism isn't anti-male universally, I've met plenty of women who are angry and hateful towards men and use feminism as their smokescreen.
(
Sheriff John Bunnell https://twitter.com/thewonderfulgam, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 10:27,
Reply)
The fact that it creates that resistance is what I mean when I say it's chaff.
I mean the word in the sense of the stuff that aircraft shoot out to distract missiles - a diversion: something unimportant made to look important. Perhaps we're talking at cross-purposes there.
You put your finger on it in your final word: if there are people who are genuinely misandrist, they may be using feminism as their smokescreen, but that's all it is; it's no more an indication of actual feminism than appeals to multiculturalism by the Muslim Council of Britain are really indications that they're all fluffy and inclusive. But just as the MCB's appeals won't tell you anything useful about what multiculturalism is, its merits, and its defects, the same applies to those of your misandrist: they won't really tell you anything useful about feminism.
(
Enzyme is powered by sunlight, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 10:49,
Reply)
Ah I see, I was talking about chaff as in separating the wheat from the chaff. I agree then.
I'm never quite sure where I stand on the "they're not real X because they're making X look bad". I don't think one section of a group can makes judgements on another section of the same group.
If two (or more) sets of people have chosen to interpret the same set of beliefs/aim/cause in different ways, can the one in the majoirty then decide that the minority group is wrong?
Bu as I say, I'm not quite sure where I stand.
(
Sheriff John Bunnell https://twitter.com/thewonderfulgam, Mon 30 Jul 2012, 12:01,
Reply)