Yes, that’s me taking the simple approach. I think Picard understands what I mean.
1 Like
What does Sir Pat have to say, though…
And yes, this is the level of my discourse today.
1 Like
Are you just yanking my chain or what?
1 Like
I just mean that neither Dilbert nor Picard are saying things that aren’t put into their mouths by the people who write them. What you say about what Adams means when he says “simple” might be true, or it might not be–he would be the ultimate arbiter of that. But given that a word like simple can have multiple meanings depending on how it is used, it might have helped us simple folks if we had known what he meant by it. Not to do so is kind of sloppy writing.
And do I look like I’m yanking your chain… Also, don’t put me on a plane. Cause I pity the fool.
But seriously, this is just my level of communication today… Sorry.
1 Like
guess you can’t rule it out? really.
1 Like
Well, that’s pretty pedantic. I also think perhaps you missed the point of my comment, which has very little to do with encapsulating Adams’ remarks and a great deal to do with the difficulty of accomplishing simplicity.
1 Like
Why wouldn’t I? They use exactly the same arguments. Advocate for gender “x” is somehow morally superior to advocate for gender “y”? I think I’ll continue to poke them both, with the same stick 
2 Likes
Because they don’t actually use the same arguments at all, and the context for the women’s and men’s rights movements are entirely different? Even as a joke, this would be a very poor false equivalence, akin to treating Martin Luther King Jr. the same as pro-white rallies.
8 Likes
So you are partisan, and find that gender “x” advocates are morally superior to gender “y” advocates. OK, someday you will get around to noticing that while the talking points are different the fundamental issues are the same. Both sides claim to want equality - no problem, I can make fun of both!
And race “a” advocates over race “b” advocates too - but in both cases, not because of the races or genders themselves, but the context.
For instance, I notice that most feminists actually do argue for equality, whereas most of the self-described MRAs have been pushing separate-but-equal at best. Sure, that’s me being partisan for equality; but it would be disappointing to hear if you’re not.
5 Likes
Just curious, in what year did feminism cease to be a cause about equality? Or am I just “partisan” to suggest that giving women the right to vote was a good thing?
I’d be interested at what point you think we achieved equality and all argument became just talking points trying to get edges.
10 Likes
Feminism is a heading that covers a broad range of beliefs, but I’ve never encountered a branch of feminist thought that simply advocates the interests of women over men; far more often, the question is one of dismantling gender divisions in general, in the common interests of all.
MRAs, by contrast, emphatically advocate gender divisions. In every encounter I’ve had with MRAs, any reasonable-sounding complaints are merely the prologue, and within a few sentences of their self-introduction as MRAs, they’re ranting about their hatred of women and their desire to subordinate them – and incidentally, their hatred of anyone who doesn’t conform to their notion of masculinity.
There’s a long-standing myth (propagandistic in origin, I believe) of man-hating feminists, but I’ve never encountered anything like this from anyone who subscribed to feminism. The only time I’ve heard rants from women about their hatred of men, the women ranting made a point of saying they were not feminists, and that they believed in gender essentialism.
There’s simply no truth in drawing a parallel between feminists and MRAs.
EDIT: fixed some typos.
6 Likes
I simply reserve the right to make fun of both groups when their discussion devolves into stereotypes and generalities - as it often seems to do. If you see no similarities between the two groups, that is certainly your privilege.
Well, make fun of who you want for whatever reasons you want. But if you want to say that there is a notable similarity between feminism and the men’s rights movement, or that feminism is about advocating for women at the expense of men then you will probably continue to find people who wish to argue the point.
7 Likes
No. Just… no. I don’t think expecting the same pay for the same work a guy does is “acting morally superior”. I don’t think being treated equally, not being sexually harassed, and maybe, just maybe having a culture that doesn’t cram a particular way of being down my and my daughters throat is thinking I’m “morally superior” in anyway. It’s asking to be treated as a human being… I’m sorry that you think I don’t deserve that has a human being. I’m sorry you think asking for basic decency and respect is acting as if I’m “morally superior” as opposed to just normal. That kind of thinking makes me really sad…
5 Likes
Please feel free to go back, and read my (short) posts here. If from those you are getting I “think I don’t deserve that has a human being.” etc then you are well down the path to proving Mr Adams post exactly right.
You aren’t saying that MRAs and feminists are the same? Huh…
2 Likes
Done.
Here it is. You are saying that people who approve of feminism but not of men’s rights are merely “partisan.”
Mindysan, on the other hand, equates feminism with:
To say that is “partisan” is indeed to say that she doesn’t deserve it just for being human. Now when you strongly implied that feminism was just sex-partisanship, you probably didn’t think of feminism as being a mere struggle for equality and freedom from harassment.
The problem is that when you are dismissive towards feminism you are dismissive towards the concerns raised by Mindysan. You don’t think you are being so because that’s not how you think of feminism, but if your idea of feminism was objective or well recognized we wouldn’t be having this discussion in the first place.
Don’t mistake your poor ability to communicate with other people being irrational. If you can’t see why what you’ve been saying (particularly this sentence right here) would be taken as insulting then you might have to consider the possibility that it is you who is missing something.
Edit: Rereading that, I don’t think you have a poor ability to communicate. I think you are genuinely dismissive toward women and towards the idea that there is still inequality between men and women that needs to be addressed.
5 Likes
This is so timely! Adams figures highly in the essay I just wrote:
“Patronizers and Condescenders.”
3 Likes
I’m just saying that he doesn’t really define simplicity, and it has various meanings. You seem to be using a very engineering-defined term, but he seems to be more talking about life in general. Maybe it’s pedantic, but I still think that it’s kind of sloppy on his part… And, we can all be sloppy writers sometimes, especially here on the internets…
And what - no love for BA gif? Come on… it’s BA the cranky, child-loving heart and muscle of the A-Team!!!
1 Like
