Edit 18 Dec 2009: I’ve seen this referred to in quite a few places round the ‘sphere as “Antifeminist Troll Bingo”. It’s not called that here, and was never called that here, because that isn’t my sole or primary intention.
Many of these statements are made not by people just stirring crap in the hope of provoking a reaction; they’re made by people who earnestly believe what they’re saying, or by people who are parroting what they’ve been socialised to believe, or by people who are knee-jerk defensive when they come across ideas of cismale privilege. Some of them may never be said in good faith, but some may; part of the point of this card, though not the whole point, is to highlight a few patterns of behaviour. These patterns occur in all sorts of contexts, not purely in trolling contexts.
Calling it “Troll Bingo” completely removes any hope of allies examining their own residual issues. I can’t control you if you do choose to call it that, but I can ask you not to. Thanks.
~~~
Update: Antifeminist Bingo II is here!
I’ve been working on an Antifeminist-Bingo! card. It was actually pretty difficult to narrow it down to 25 cells; there are plenty more I could have added, and you’re invited to add your own in the comments.
If you find yourself getting frustrated in a feminist conversation with someone who seems to just Not Get It, have a peek through the card. Odds are your antagonist will have used 3, 4, 5 or more of these somewhere along the line.
If you’re a man trying not to be an arsehole in feminist conversations, but you seem to find yourself floundering and can’t figure out why, you might like to scrutinise your comments critically to see if some of these messages are inadvertently coming across.
| But I like my women feminine. | Feminists have got it all wrong. I’m an equalist. | Women are just naturally better at that sort of thing. | It’s your job to teach me about feminism. Now do it. | Patriarchy hurts men too. |
| You just don’t like sex, so you want to spoil it for everyone else. | Sexual assault is rare. You’re just paranoid. | She gave it away plenty of times before. | We gave you the vote, now shut up. | If you want to be treated like a lady, you’d better start acting like one. |
| Women just can’t be objective about gender issues. | You’ll never get laid with that attitude. | Can’t you take a joke? | You give feminists a bad name. | I’m just an old-fashioned gentleman. |
| You’re so sexy when you’re angry. | Is it that time of the month? | You’ve just got a victim mentality. | All you feminists need is a good deep-dicking. | You’re being silly and overemotional. |
| Women have all the power over men- you can reduce us to an uncontrollable jelly of lust! | You feminists all hate men! | I’m a nice guy(tm), why don’t I get any? | I’ll tell you what’s wrong with feminism… | But I want to talk about this. Listen to me! |
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 License Remix and enjoy, good-faith feminism only please.
What triggered this? I’ve been reading this comments thread at Alas, A Blog, starting around about here.
*Note: The domain on which Alas is hosted was sold to pornographers in mid 2006. There is no porn at the link above, but your hits or may not indirectly support misogynistic, racist, lesbian-exploitation, and teen porn, despite the “nofollow” attribute I’ve added. I’m not sure whether directing you to a google cached page reduces this, but in case it does, here*.
The conversation started around the soi-disant “Nice Guys” label. There are a number of men who argue something along the lines of:
– Women say they prefer nice guys, not arseholes.
– I’m a nice guy, I’m just shy and awkward.
– But I’m not getting sex.
– And I deserve sex, cos I’m nice.
– Therefore, women are lying.
Hilarity ensued, and eventually “Hugh Ristik” came up with this gem about how feminists are getting it wrong:
“While feminism has done some work encouraging women to be more sexually assertive, it has done a lot more work encouraging men to be sexually passive. What outreach have feminists done to encourage female sexual assertiveness that are on the scale, of say”¦ date rape seminars that are institutionalized in many high schools and colleges?”
After you pick up your jaw at the equation of teaching men not to be sexual criminals and teaching women to be sexually available, have a peek at the card. Ristik seems to be an Antifeminist-Bingo! bottom-dweller of the Entitlement Variety.
Working backwards on the card, firstly Ristik steers the conversation to his pet fabricated agenda, the forced sexual “passivity” of teen boys resulting from those emasculating feminists who have taken away “sexual assertiveness” (rape) as a societally accepted option.
Next up, he starts telling us what’s wrong with feminism today. Mostly, we don’t pay anywhere near enough attention to his pet topic, Nice Guys(tm) not getting enough sex. Apparently, we should be all his slut-mommies, and it’s our job to get him and his shy compatriots laid, because that’s their entitlement as men.
Oh, and we hate men. We got that. “Don’t rape women” isn’t softened and qualified nearly enough; it results in men feeling “paralysed”, their masculinity whipped out from under them, and along with it, their agency. Ristik elaborates:
“It’s different because this attitude, of obsessive and paralyzing worry about “pressuring” women is a product of feminism. If feminists don’t intend their messages to men to have this impact, then that’s comforting, but it doesn’t change the fact that feminist messages do have this impact, and feminists don’t qualify their messages in a way to not paralyze men (not all, or even most men, but especially shy men). Feminists cannot wash their hands of this by claiming ignorance of this paralyzing impact on some men, because men have been telling feminists this for decades and feminists haven’t been listening. At best, this is gross negligence.”
Once again, we’re doing feminism all wrong, we need men to tell us how to fix it, and don’t we realise we have all the power now? If men can’t rape, they’re trapped. Enfeebled.
Later in the thread:
“Date rape seminars, while necessary, also have the side-effect of encouraging men to be more passive. I’m saying that if men are going to become more passive, then we need women to become more proactive to pick up the slack, otherwise everyone will become too passive!”
Awooga! Awooga! No rape = no-one’s getting any sex! Emergency! Emergency!
It’s like a master-class in male sexual entitlement.
Addendum: several people at Pandagon have complained that “Patriarchy hurts men, too” shouldn’t be on the card, because it’s a true statement. Mickle and tigtog have addressed the subject succintly, so I’ll quote from them.
“Please remember that this is BINGO people!
The point is to get 5 in a row, not just 1.
There are several boxes that, in certain situations and without any other additions from our lovely board, would not immediately indicate an anti-feminist is present. Interestingly enough, many of them, unlike the oh, so controversial inclusion of “patriarchy hurts men too!”, have nothing to do with men.”
and tigtog:
“As for this card: remember that the whole anti-feminist bingo idea is in response to trolls being arseholes, and trotting out “But Patriarchy Hurts Men Too” as a trump card which is so Much More Important than whatever the feminists were previously talking about.
Pandagon and quite a few other feminist blogs have a pretty good record of putting up posts which discuss the way that Patriarchy screws up men too. That concept is a central idea in feminist theory, and is referenced often.
So surely, anyone who raises “but it hurts men too” on posts discussing specific women’s experiences is being off-topic and disrupting the discourse. Unless they’re also displaying some of the other telltales on the bingo card they may not be anti-feminist trolls, but it’s one box well worth ticking.”
Edited again to add : I just spotted this “White Liberal Bingo” card at “i_dreamed_i_was”‘s LJ. Featuring entries such as “White people have ethnicities, too! *pout*”, “POC can’t exactly claim cultural appropriation while using the “white man’s computer”, and “Talking about racism is so divisive”, it’s worth a look.
And don’t miss “Sexual Assault Bingo” by Midnight Louise, as reference on Feministe. Includes: “It was just stupid groping! It’s not like he was actually…”, “Is this really worth ruining a man’s future?” and “Am I supposed to believe you went into his room and shut the door behind you and you didn’t expect – “
Categories: gender & feminism, Meta
On not buying into the LULZer playbook at FtB (or anywhere) #WeLoveFTB 
Friday Hoyden: Sady Doyle 
10 rules for women blogging about their relationship woes 
Hoyden About Town 
Strange. I read the post when it first went up and only had a few comments. Ristik hadn’t made an appearance by that time.
I obviously need to add a few more FWW/FAQs to the collation over at Feminism 101.
My mind works in strange ways late at night. I was looking at the title of this post, thinking “Anti-Feminist-Bingo!” “AFB!” “Short for Acid-Fast Bacilli, too.” “That makes sense. They’re the bugs that cause tuberculosis.”
Nasty, purulent, consumptive pathogens, the lot of them.
A quick abbreviations search also reveals that it’s short for “Assault Float Bridge” and “Away From Brain”.
I think you forgot –
“Get back to the kitchen you silly bint”.
Oh and by the way – back to the kitchen – you silly bint.
How about “Some feminists somewhere, once upon a time, hurt my feelings, and that’s more important than anything else.”
My favorite.
QueenMab: noted for the 6×6 version.
Just thought I’d let the Hoydenistas know that Ristik has decided to make an appearance in my personal LJ to issue a bewildered, contorted whine about how unmuddling “assertiveness” and aggression is all confusing and stuff, and about how frightful it is that some guys get to fuck less while they’re paralysed by their inability to sort out the muddle.
Just in case you were interested in a further glimpse into his mind.
He really just doesn’t get that treating each other as individual people with deeply personal emotions and motivations MAKES SEX BETTER ie more fun because you know and LIKE each other, not just have the hots for each other.
Yes, it cuts down on the likelihood of one night stands when people decide that they prefer to take time to get to know each other. However, it makes for a sharp rise in the number of happy repeating fuckbuddies and (gasp!) lasting pairings.
I think actual human communication, over grunts and cliches, makes one-night-stands better too. Knowing what other people want, instead of guessing or presuming? Priceless.
Well yes, there’s that too. I didn’t mean to imply that there’s anything intrinsically wrong with having a one night stand with someone you find sexy and likeable, just that most people in the long run are looking for slightly deeper/longer (jrh) relationships.
I think it is painfully obvious that Feminists seek the emasculation of men. I’ve been reading feminist blogs for sometime and they are basically male bashing to one degree or another. Men are assholes, they talk to me in stores, they dare to have an opinion on sex, on promiscuity etc., they dare to think they should have a voice on the topic of abortion and the whining goes on and on. Perpetual outrage and antagonism will not deliver victory in the end.
No, no, the idea is to get five in a row. Thanks for playing! Try the mountain oysters.
Wait? What’s wrong with calling myself an equalist? I consider myself an equalist because I also am against cases of discrimination against men as well as discrimination against women. Then again, I don’t think feminists have anything “wrong” I think they have pretty much everything “right” I just personally prefer the term equalist as it is more inkeeping with my end goals (equality).
Which is what the vast majority of feminists believe in too. I just I think the term is more accurate, not the ideology (which I think is spot-on).
Grace, I don’t there’s anything wrong with being/calling oneself an equalist generally.
But why the perception (not necessarily yours) that feminists aren’t already equalists? They’re not feminists instead of being equalists, they’re feminists because they are equalists.
It’s not an either/or thing.
PS. I mean, Feminism is to Equalism as Protestant is to Christianity. Both/And. Distinct goals/culture/mission within a broader shared worldview.
Ah I get you, the people who bash feminists and call themselves equalists haven’t really gotten the ‘equal’ part of equalist. I agree with that!
I think it is painfully obvious that the patriarchy seek the subjugation of women. I’ve been reading patriarchal blogs for sometime and they are basically female bashing to one degree or another. Women are bitches, they talk to me in stores, they dare to have an opinion on sex, on promiscuity etc., they dare to think they should have a voice on the topic of abortion and the whining goes on and on. Perpetual outrage and antagonism will not deliver victory in the end.
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
I loved this. But I didn’t like clicking on your link and unwillingly being taken to a pornography pimp’s blog.
Alas has been pimping out his blog for some time now. Faced with mounting bills, Barry Deutsch did what pimps the world over do, he decided the best way to manage his financial crisis was to profit off the sale of women’s bodies; teens, black, Latina, Asian, native. Alas got them all for YOU!
Alas, a blog runs on WordPress blogging and **review software.**
Click “review software” on the bottom right of Alas opening page and arrive here:
ENTER B4NGBR0S B4NG BR0S !
(edited to redact name, because I found googlehits to this page from searches on the name – tigtog)
Pony,
that decision of Amp’s is why Alas is no longer on the blogroll here at Hoyden. (there is a link for a blog called Ampersand Duck which is totally unrelated and highly recommended).
I do understand your concerns about how Amp pays the hosting bills for Alas, through allowing a pornographer to hitch a ride on his site-rankings, I really do.
Despite a decision which I hated, Alas still has some pretty amazing contributors and posts on relevant feminist issues, which is why Alas is still in my feedreader and why I still click through on occasion. If there’s a really powerful post and comments, I do occasionally still link to Alas (last time was, I think, for his posts regarding Prison Rape).
That certainly is less than a perfectly purist position on porn-enabling, I know – but I’m one of those feminists who has sympathies with aspects of both sides of the anti-porn/sex-positive debate. I’m deeply cynical regarding the porn industry, and I refer to myself as sexually liberated rather than sex-positive because I can’t stand the term, but I’m not an anti-porn activist.
Lauredhel makes her own decisions on who to link to, but that’s a simple picture of my position.
Grace:
Tigtog responded; I just thought I add a link to her Finally, a Feminism 101 entry on this.
Pony:
You’re absolutely right; I thought I had a warning that it was an Alas link in the text, but I didn’t. I’ll fix it right now. I wonder whether a link to a cached Google page would reduce the SEO effect?
A rather massive oversight, given that I’m in the midst of writing a 5500 word paper using that particular drama as an example of a conflict between traditional and feminist ethics. *thwaps self upside head*
Thanks for responding Tigtog.
I would have preferred some indication that I would be linking there. I won’t visit his site. Every hit contributes to his ability to pimp out women’s bodies, makes his site worthwhile to B4ng Br0s. (edited to redact name, because I found googlehits to this page from searches on the name – tigtog)
What if he was linking his blog to a racist server?
Ah screw it.
Why the hell should I care about other peoples feelings, when it serves me no purpose?
A males prerogative is to mate.
That’s why after sex, we’ll usually fall asleep.
There is no reason why a man should get defensive because a female group works against them.
At least, not until they start chemical castrations…
Pony, the post has been updated now and a disclaimer added, and yes, that should have happened from the first.
That’s a very good question to which I don’t have any good answer.
In some ways, a racist hate site, while repulsive, would not be aiming to simply make a commercial profit from women’s pain, so taking their dime to write anti-racist stuff could be partly justified as subversively satisfying: they’re just (I know, just!) talking up hate, not making money from exploitation and suffering day in and day out.
That’s obviously not something one can claim about taking the porn merchants’ dime.
Anti-porn is not my primary feminist focus, but I only have that luxury because of the work of radfems like you putting in those hard yards. I’m grateful for the reminders when I misstep and overlook porn issues. And porn is so easy to overlook in the Not My Nigel situation – I like what Amp and his cobloggers write, so I give him a break I wouldn’t give to someone else. You’re right to point that out.
I know that I would be more immediately rejecting of racism, largely because I have the luxury of externalising it more – I don’t live with its consequences in the same way that I live a life permeated by sexist oppressions. That familiarity leads me to second-guess myself on sexism more than racism when it comes to pointing fingers, so that in some circumstances I’m more willing to call racist shit out than call sexist shit out (a fairly typical white privilege stance, as we all saw with the Don Imus fallout).
This has been an interesting exercise in self-examination. I really mean that. Thank you.
P.S. Are you willing to link to some of what you consider the best antiporn manifesto writing of the last few years for the Feminism 101 FAQ on fighting feminists? I’m not familiar enough with the most persuasive pieces, but I’d really like to add links to them.
Thanks, Anonymous from Georgia, there are at least two here that I can toss into the pool for v 2.0.
Oh what a good idea. I can think of several and I could ask a couple of experts for their suggestions. I’m not sure what you mean by link, though, and how many would be about right?
I don’t have a blog.
Pony, just follow the link to the FAQ in my previous comment and leave the URLs of posts in comments to the FAQ post. That would be great.
The idea of the Feminism 101 blog is to be a linkfarm of the best posts on feminist issues organised around FAQs and with readers supplying more links in comments.
Re: the Alas linking thing, one way to get around the link/hits thing is to format the link as (a href=”URL” rel=”nofollow”). As far as I’m aware, this will let you link to Alas without actually supporting the metrics that allow hits to Amp’s blog support the other stuff on the site.
This may be too obscure to be included, but one of the (younger) women at work yesterday, upon hearing that I was a feminist, told me “I hate those feminists who insist on like equal rights and everything but then still want men to open doors for them”.
To which my reply was “And when I meet one of those I’ll pass on your discontent”, but I thought it worth sharing.
Also, hi, I just discovered you (via Pandagon). Whee! Australians!
Hi rainne and welcome! The door thing is a recurring theme. Nice reply – don’t you love it when you come up with these things on the spot, rather than three hours later? (Tigtog, what was the term for that phenomenon, used on LP recently?)
A Pandagonian also mentioned “Don’t forget some reference to being assaulted for trying to hold a door open for a lady.” Point me to a pattern of cases of actual assault in this setting, and I’ll start listening, fellas.
“L’esprit d’escalier” – which I note scans perfectly (and offspring-startlingly) to Donna e mobile, perhaps the most misogynistic operatic aria.
Wit of the staircase – you don’t figure out the perfect response until you’re separated by a flight of stairs.
arielladrake:
Thanks – done!
Oh, Lauredhel, this is fabulous. I’m linking to it right now.
Mindy, your comment was delightful.
Hi Medbh! Lovely to meet you, and I’m glad you liked it.
Hey, we just got a “teh feminists are oppressing me!” from an MRA that’s infested IBTP. We’re trying to ignore him but it’s just . . . so . . . HARD.
It’s a question of not support Barry Deutsch, who is a pimp. There are euphemisms one could use, but I calls it as I sees it.
Barry was ABLE to sell his blog because because of all the smart feminist writers there, and the readers and posters those women attract. See? Feminist working to support porn.
It’s not just a question of the hits. It’s an ethical question too; pornography is rape on film.
Isn’t it fun to pretend? Emmeline Pankhurst fought tirelessly for, was beaten for, and went to jail for the right to be heard. You play bingo. Cute.
I know, I know, lets see the board. . . 5 in a row. . . blah blah blah!
Emmeline Pankhurst didn’t have the internet. I bet she would have used it if she had. Don’t think we are pretending either. We are serious, we just don’t take ourselves too seriously all the time.
E the Wise, cob logger to Infidel Sage, just wants an argument.
Why not try a serious debate, mate?
“There are several boxes that, in certain situations and without any other additions from our lovely board, would not immediately indicate an anti-feminist is present.”
I think the reason that one was picked out is that it’s one of only two, if I’m correct, which can appear in the context of *discussing feminism*, written by a feminist, and not be even slightly rude.
The other I spotted was “Women just can’t be objective about gender issues,” which in the right context means something akin to “The personal is political”.
Interesting Bingo chart: there’s only one way to get Bingo without getting at least one really grossly anti-feminist comment. Everything on row two is pretty horrible. Row four column four and row five column one are too. And row one column two is a dead giveaway.
This means the only way to get Bingoed without saying at least one grossly-offensive-by-itself-in-any-context thing is to say everything on row three, which certainly adds up pretty awful (since the only OK contexts for the five items are completely different and non-overlapping).
As for Alas, A Blog:
Ewwww.
https://hoydenabouttown.com/20061011.88/um-stunned/#comment-1408
It’s not just helping porn sites: it’s helping violent and explicitly misogynistic porn sites. And he didn’t admit it upfront: he hid it. Plus which the entire “search engine optimizer” scheme is illegitimate, as he should have known. Even pro-porn feminists can be quite legitimately grossly, grossly offended by that action.
Following a trackback, I happened across this thread at Girls Read Comics (And They’re Pissed), which has a marvelous Anti-Comics-Feminist Bingo card. On page 3, poster Betty made me burst out loud laughing, which rather startled the dog:
Would it be permissible to make an animated icon of this fabulous bingo card? Full credit would be given.
False premise: Not all feminists are women. I’ve been a feminist since the late 1970s and I’m as manly a man as you’d want a guy to be. Your bingo wouldn’t work for me.
BTW, nice guys do get the girls, BTW, lots of them. 🙂
SplendidOne, surely feminist men have the experience of having these stereotypes of women thrown around whenever an issue of sexual equality comes up? You can use it then.
As for nice guys getting the girls plenty, we know that, unfortunately it’s the guys who think that simply not-raping and not-bashing women makes them “nice” that are the whiners.
Lynn Kendall:
Absolutely – consider it Creative Commonsed. Non-commercial modifications are welcome, so long as good faith feminism is involved.
I’ve been compiling a whole lot of other possible squares, and have been hoping someone could whip up a script to generate random cards.
Majikthise has a good synopsis of the NiceGuys(tm) phenomenon referred to on the card, here.
Another Feministing reader here! I’m glad I stopped by — awesome post! The Anti-Feminist Bingo card will definitely come in handy! ;-D
Was linked here from a commenter at “I Blame the Patriarchy.” Fantastic post. I’ll be using this a lot!
Hi Audrey and Panic! Welcome to the Hoyden party. Pull up a drink.
Hi – also referred by IBTP. Loved your (and Mindy’s) responses to the Infantile Sage! Maybe we could start those chemical castrations as soon as they fall asleep.
Hi Cathy!
fucking […] priceless. women […] marginalised. deep admiring respect for […] you people […] and […] Greer.
[mod note: Heavily edited to remove abuse and general brainless misogynistic drivel. Thanks for dropping by! …lauredhel.]
“You’ll never get laid with that attitude”
That’s my favourite one! I bet is one of the biggest reasons why women escape from feminism as if from the plague.
the fat hate bingo had it so you could buy it as a shirt!
I want an antifeminist bingo shirt
thewell: it’s Creative Commonsed, Attribution/Non-commercial. You’re welcome to print yourself a copy, so long as you’re not selling it and you do attribute it (“Antifeminist Bingo by Lauredhel at Hoyden About Town” is fine).
Cheers.
Lauredhel’s last blog post..Kiwiland convulses
That familiarity leads me to second-guess myself on sexism more than racism when it comes to pointing fingers, so that in some circumstances I’m more willing to call racist shit out than call sexist shit out (a fairly typical white privilege stance, as we all saw with the Don Imus fallout).
For what its worth, there’s a hair salon in downtown LA whos name was Oh My Nappy Hair. They specialize in black hair. A week after the Imus scandal broke, they changed their name to Nappy Headed Hos. So yeah, the community was really pissed about the Imus thing. Right. Reality: The enterprising women running the salon are laughing all the way to the bank.
Ryan, I suggest reading about linguistic reclamation.
Exactly ;D So yeah, the community was really pissed about the Imus thing. <– That was sarcasm ^_~
I don’t suppose we have any German speakers here who could translate that latest trackback? Thanks.
Just found this. Want to say ‘thank you.’
Helpful in advising me to keep my damn mouth shut and investigate rather than becoming an asshat. And it also helps in pointing out what exactly is wrong with something when I’m too blind/privileged to see it at the moment.
Hi Juan, thanks for commenting. Glad it was useful to you.
Lauredhel’s last blog post..Racist artwork from Marcotte?s Seal Press book ?It?s a Jungle Out There?
Sexism does hurt men too. It’s not anti-feminist to say so (unless you’re only talking about the ‘feminism is the only important kind of discrimination’ subset of feminists).
Patriarchy does not allow men to feel sad or scared.
If they do feel sad or scared, they are not able to get support for it.
Patriarchy doesn’t allow men to have genuine relationships with their children, especially infants.
They are trained to be inept at childcare and uncertain around babies.
Patriarchy equates almost all male expressions of physical affection with sex.
Men are not allowed to be physically affectionate to other men, because that’s seen to indicate homosexuality. Even boys well before puberty get this.
If men feel any kind of affection towards a non-relative woman, they are assumed to be sexually attracted to her. It’s not considered possible for men to simply be friends with women.
Patriarchy trains men to equate sex, love and power. This results in some men, especially those who are already vulnerable to those attitudes, to become abusers.
Abusive men are treated as ‘true men’, which harms the men who are not abusive.
Women are also trained by the higher percentage of male abusers and the societal attitudes that create them to fear men, and assume that men, especially angry men, are potentially dangerous.
Patriarchy trains men to do the initiating of sex, and women to respond.
This harms men, and adolescent boys, who are too shy or anxious to initiate.
This trains bolder men to be invasive, expecting that if they keep pressuring, the woman will agree to sex. It also leaves men likely to overlook or disregard signs that the woman is not consenting. Because women are often expected to put up ‘token’ resistence, real resistence may be mistaken for token resistence. Men are left uncertain or guilty about being too pushy.
Patriarchy divides many activities into ‘male’ and ‘female’. This harms boys and men who would enjoy female activities, and/or do not enjoy male activities. For example, nurturing boys, unathletic boys, men who like children and men who are not very competitive are harmed by these divisions.
Boys are expected to be, like girls, strongly bonded to their mother in early childhood, but unlike girls, a boy who is still strongly bonded to his mother in mid-late childhood is ridiculed.
Male victims of abuse are treated as either complicit in the abuse (eg adolescent boy sexually abused by adult woman) or inferior and weak, to a much greater degree than female victims.
These are many ways that traditional patriarchy hurts men and boys. To claim that patriarchy only hurts women and girls is a disservice to male victims of patriarchy and helps to rob women of allies in the fight against patriarchy.
Everything you say about patriarchy above is true. Just remember that it’s bingo, Ettina. One square on its own doesn’t get anyone an anti-feminist prize. Quite a few of the squares on the board are capable of being argued from a good-faith position as well as from a point of pure antagonism (e.g. there’s nothing at all wrong with arguing for equalism except where the arguer assumes that feminists aren’t also equalists).
It’s that square in conjunction with four more in a row that means one can be pretty sure that one has a real, live, antifeminist on one’s hands. The sort who just wants feminists to stop talking about something that hurts women and only talk about the things that hurt men.
@ Grace: Nothing is wrong with calling yourself an equalist, but if you say it like on the bingo card, it implies that feminism isn’t about equality of the sexes (you know, that annoying old chauvinist myth about how feminism is about women taking control of men or whatever). 🙂
Wait how is “Patriarchy hurts men too” anti-feminist? If anything, it’s yet another reason I call myself a feminist, and more of a reason for men to be feminists!
[Asked and answered, Kripa – read the comments thread. ~L]
I really need to add “but he has a heart of gold!” to this one.
Can we get a “Not ALL men!!1″ in the next one please? Cause that’s one of my favorites.