3 ms·

I think you refuse to see how polemical that quote is. If it weren't such a contentious topic, people would not be comparing it to the dogma of religion. Findi

I think you refuse to see how polemical that quote is. If it weren't such a contentious topic, people would not be comparing it to the dogma of religion. Finding an article unconvincing warrants a shrug or some skepticism, not invective against some bogeyman of a feminist cult. It's not disagreeing, it's how the disagreement is expressed. But please, go ahead and vehemently defend people who immediately resort to contempt when the idea that a woman was overlooked by history appears.

AnthonyMouse 11y ago
> It's not disagreeing, it's how the disagreement is expressed. Putting aside that that was not your original complaint, why are you then engaging in the behavior you're objecting to? It doesn't help anything to become the zealot your antagonists are expecting. The conundrum of modern feminism is that 20th century feminists got nearly everything they wanted. What remains is the hard, subtle, detail-oriented work that doesn't lend itself to sound bites or sloganeering. But there are people with no patients for that kind of work who would rather stall progress by fighting against men rather than for equality. And those people provoke the reactions you're objecting to by conditioning men to expect to be accused of things they haven't done and blamed for things that happened before they were born.