What I Wrote on Another Blog
But yes; two birds with one stone. I get to make a quick-and-easy blog post that is zippy and zesty, plus I get to introduce a new blog and send some traffic to it. This new blog constitutes, as I would aver, a strategic locus of interstitiality, so for that reason alone I am quite certain that you will want to look into it!
It is, of course, the blog of Lady Catherine:
Musings of a Pro-Humanist Woman
All right, I left a comment on LC's latest post, as you will find out if you follow the above link. When you read that post it will give you the full context, however, I share the comment below. I think it touches on a couple of important things:
"I actually think social conservatism is terrible and hurtful to others. "I must now contradict my stated policy in the comment, and admit that I do, in fact, have a misogynistic bone in my body -- to be exact, the second phalange in my left pinky! It is dreadfully misogynistic. And how do I know this? Because the lab results came back a few days ago. But as we all know, feminists haven't got any sense of humor -- especially not the dry, English kind of humour which I, as an American, am imitating here. And that is why I am outing this wicked morsel of information to all the world!
It depends on what you are calling 'social conservatism'. So. . I am not sure what to make of this statement.
As for FOTC, her critique of the so-called MRA movement is done in smorgasbord style: she picks what she wants to put on her plate, arranges this artistically, and calls the final composition "the MRM" as if she were describing something objectively real -- which, to some extent it is, but to another extent, it is not. That makes it a half truth, which, in my considered opinion is considerably worse than a full lie.
And no, my own analysis of feminism does NOT commit this fault.
ALSO. . . . FOTC fails to consider that the "MRM" is only one piece of a much, much broader picture. That "picture" is, of course, the non-feminist revolution as a whole.
"The MRAs I really respect like Fidelbogen(excuse me he's a non-feminist :-)) and Paul Elam don't have a misogynist bone in their body."
Thanks for pointing out that I am a non-feminist! ;) Of course, I am also a Male Rights Agitator -- I can't deny that the descriptor fits pretty well what I do, so I might as well wear it, eh?
As for not having a misogynistic bone in my body: I ought to flesh out that characterization a little bit more. While I neither affirm nor dispute this statement, it is critically important to add that I do not care in the least if anybody THINKS that I have a misogynistic bone in my body.
As a non-feminist I am not bound to answer to any such charge, because I am not bound by the social construct within which the charge is framed. I consider "misogyny" and "misogynist" to be feminist terminology, and as such, permanently tainted.