5 ms·

Regardless of how it started, it’s seemed pretty clear to me that the alt-right has been a very deliberate vehicle for the radical right to recruit young people

Regardless of how it started, it’s seemed pretty clear to me that the alt-right has been a very deliberate vehicle for the radical right to recruit young people for quite some time now.

woofie11 7y ago
The damning thing is the alt-right is very occasionally right. This one stuck out at me: > I trained myself to freeze my facial expression into something neutral so that when I countered Sam’s remarks—“Feminists keep divorced dads from seeing their kids” was a favorite—it would seem as if I’d actually considered his perspective. A big chunk of the alt-right is precisely divorced dads drawn in, or people drawn to their stories, and the insane racist, sexist, and other baggage comes along. Much of the far-left is precisely people drawn to horror stories from LGBTQ members or African Americans who join a community and bring along similarly insane baggage for the ride. I'm pretty convinced that unless the left manages to find a way to dive into alt-right ideology, with an open mind, and bring in the very few sane pieces, and change their opinions about the places that their reasoning is wrong, the alt-right will be able to keep recruiting.
- darpa_escapee 7y ago
  > “Feminists keep divorced dads from seeing their kids” was a favorite—it would seem as if I’d actually considered his perspective. Except that feminism actively derides both the gender norms that say mothers are better caregivers and the US court system's bias against fathers in child custody rulings. There is literally decades of literature and other sources on these points. A old, common talking point and accusation is that feminism is equivalent to female supremacy, and antifeminist groups recruit men who feel emasculated by women[1]: > A second set of texts presents varieties of the contemporary masculinist response. Like its earlier incarnation, contemporary masculinist response is split between efforts to dislodge women's supremacy in the private sphere and support for men who are "wounded" in the struggle to exude an aura of masculinity in the public sphere. > Men's challenges to women's perceived parental monopoly come from men's rights groups such as the Coalition for Free Men, Men's Rights International, and Men Achieving Liberation and Equality (MALE), as well as numerous fathers' support groups. These groups often deny that men have power in society, arguing that male supremacy is an illusion, along the lines of the illusion of the chauffeur: "he's dressed in the uniform and he looks like he's in the driver's seat," noted Warren Farrell, "but from his perspective someone else is giving the orders" (cited in Woldenberg 1986, p. 10). Masculinist texts claim that women and men are "equally oppressed" (Baumli 1986) and rail against perceived institutionalized female privileges, such as exemptions from the draft and advantages in alimony, child custody, and child support (Goldberg 1976; Haddad 1979). One critical review of these texts summarized their claims as follows: > > Men, they say, are emotionally and sexually manipulated by women, forced into provider roles where they work themselves to death for their gold-digger wives, kept from equal participation and power in family life, and finally dumped by wives only to have courts and lawyers give all the property, money, and child custody to the women. (Messner 1986, p. 32) [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/189564 https://www.jstor.org/stable/189564
  - thethirdone 7y ago
    > Except that feminism actively derides both the gender norms that say mothers are better caregivers and the US court system's bias against fathers in child custody rulings. Among people who call themselves feminists there are both people who strive for equality (and better relations) between the sexes and those who are striving for better conditions for women only. Many self-proclaimed feminists probably wouldn't consider bias against fathers in child custody rulings a major issue. And those who don't concern themselves with men's rights are likely to alienate men in their quest for better treatment of women.
  - ddxxdd 7y ago
    >Except that feminism actively derides both the gender norms that say mothers are better caregivers and the US court system's bias against fathers in child custody rulings. There is literally decades of literature and other sources on these points. But a feminist was the originator of the idea that women should get primary custody of children[1], and the National Organization for Women opposes joint custody[2][3], and highly patriarchal societies such as Saudi Arabia generally give default custody to the father (Saudi Arabia just changed the law last year, and now mothers get primary custory[4]) I would say that the idea that "gender roles, not feminism, is responsible for default custody for mothers" is by far the most commonly debunked argument amongst the men's rights community. [1] https://baysingerlaw.com/2018/02/tender-years-doctrine-origin-history-modern-usage-criticism/ https://baysingerlaw.com/2018/02/tender-years-doctrine-origi... [2] http://archive.is/mbfAY http://archive.is/mbfAY [3] http://web.archive.org/web/20070708213232/http://michnow.org/jointcustody507.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20070708213232/http://michnow.org... [4] https://www.khaleejtimes.com/region/saudi-arabia/saudi-arabia-grants-divorced-women-right-to-child-custody- https://www.khaleejtimes.com/region/saudi-arabia/saudi-arabi...
    - claudiawerner 7y ago
      This reply or at least the first source cited is a little disingenuous; modern feminism (mostly third wave and left-wing) rejects the doctrine of essentialism used by second wave feminists. Most third wave feminists are highly critical of gender essentialism (for instance on trans issues which for them must deny essentialism) to the point where you and the person you're replying to are speaking of totally different movements. It would be like saying that science can't explain the motion of the planets - but of course it can, if we're talking about the majority of scientists after Newton. The boy's hate for feminism should not right extend past the 19th century women named in the article. If you don't believe me when it comes to what modern feminism actually believes I'd be happy to walk through a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article to make the point. Most modern feminists do not support the tender years doctrine.

Regardless of how it started, it’s seemed pretty clear to me that the alt-right has been a very deliberate vehicle for the radical right to recruit young people for quite some time now.

woofie11 7y ago

The damning thing is the alt-right is very occasionally right. This one stuck out at me: > I trained myself to freeze my facial expression into something neutral so that when I countered Sam’s remarks—“Feminists keep divorced dads from seeing their kids” was a favorite—it would seem as if I’d actually considered his perspective. A big chunk of the alt-right is precisely divorced dads drawn in, or people drawn to their stories, and the insane racist, sexist, and other baggage comes along. Much of the far-left is precisely people drawn to horror stories from LGBTQ members or African Americans who join a community and bring along similarly insane baggage for the ride. I'm pretty convinced that unless the left manages to find a way to dive into alt-right ideology, with an open mind, and bring in the very few sane pieces, and change their opinions about the places that their reasoning is wrong, the alt-right will be able to keep recruiting.

darpa_escapee 7y ago
> “Feminists keep divorced dads from seeing their kids” was a favorite—it would seem as if I’d actually considered his perspective. Except that feminism actively derides both the gender norms that say mothers are better caregivers and the US court system's bias against fathers in child custody rulings. There is literally decades of literature and other sources on these points. A old, common talking point and accusation is that feminism is equivalent to female supremacy, and antifeminist groups recruit men who feel emasculated by women[1]: > A second set of texts presents varieties of the contemporary masculinist response. Like its earlier incarnation, contemporary masculinist response is split between efforts to dislodge women's supremacy in the private sphere and support for men who are "wounded" in the struggle to exude an aura of masculinity in the public sphere. > Men's challenges to women's perceived parental monopoly come from men's rights groups such as the Coalition for Free Men, Men's Rights International, and Men Achieving Liberation and Equality (MALE), as well as numerous fathers' support groups. These groups often deny that men have power in society, arguing that male supremacy is an illusion, along the lines of the illusion of the chauffeur: "he's dressed in the uniform and he looks like he's in the driver's seat," noted Warren Farrell, "but from his perspective someone else is giving the orders" (cited in Woldenberg 1986, p. 10). Masculinist texts claim that women and men are "equally oppressed" (Baumli 1986) and rail against perceived institutionalized female privileges, such as exemptions from the draft and advantages in alimony, child custody, and child support (Goldberg 1976; Haddad 1979). One critical review of these texts summarized their claims as follows: > > Men, they say, are emotionally and sexually manipulated by women, forced into provider roles where they work themselves to death for their gold-digger wives, kept from equal participation and power in family life, and finally dumped by wives only to have courts and lawyers give all the property, money, and child custody to the women. (Messner 1986, p. 32) [1] https://www.jstor.org/stable/189564 https://www.jstor.org/stable/189564
- thethirdone 7y ago
  > Except that feminism actively derides both the gender norms that say mothers are better caregivers and the US court system's bias against fathers in child custody rulings. Among people who call themselves feminists there are both people who strive for equality (and better relations) between the sexes and those who are striving for better conditions for women only. Many self-proclaimed feminists probably wouldn't consider bias against fathers in child custody rulings a major issue. And those who don't concern themselves with men's rights are likely to alienate men in their quest for better treatment of women.
- ddxxdd 7y ago
  >Except that feminism actively derides both the gender norms that say mothers are better caregivers and the US court system's bias against fathers in child custody rulings. There is literally decades of literature and other sources on these points. But a feminist was the originator of the idea that women should get primary custody of children[1], and the National Organization for Women opposes joint custody[2][3], and highly patriarchal societies such as Saudi Arabia generally give default custody to the father (Saudi Arabia just changed the law last year, and now mothers get primary custory[4]) I would say that the idea that "gender roles, not feminism, is responsible for default custody for mothers" is by far the most commonly debunked argument amongst the men's rights community. [1] https://baysingerlaw.com/2018/02/tender-years-doctrine-origin-history-modern-usage-criticism/ https://baysingerlaw.com/2018/02/tender-years-doctrine-origi... [2] http://archive.is/mbfAY http://archive.is/mbfAY [3] http://web.archive.org/web/20070708213232/http://michnow.org/jointcustody507.htm http://web.archive.org/web/20070708213232/http://michnow.org... [4] https://www.khaleejtimes.com/region/saudi-arabia/saudi-arabia-grants-divorced-women-right-to-child-custody- https://www.khaleejtimes.com/region/saudi-arabia/saudi-arabi...
  - claudiawerner 7y ago
    This reply or at least the first source cited is a little disingenuous; modern feminism (mostly third wave and left-wing) rejects the doctrine of essentialism used by second wave feminists. Most third wave feminists are highly critical of gender essentialism (for instance on trans issues which for them must deny essentialism) to the point where you and the person you're replying to are speaking of totally different movements. It would be like saying that science can't explain the motion of the planets - but of course it can, if we're talking about the majority of scientists after Newton. The boy's hate for feminism should not right extend past the 19th century women named in the article. If you don't believe me when it comes to what modern feminism actually believes I'd be happy to walk through a Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article to make the point. Most modern feminists do not support the tender years doctrine.