Why does Belle Knox consider herself a feminist?

[BainsBane]

142. I didn't mention it because I don't think RQ can hold her own

Last edited Sun Aug 17, 2014, 01:56 AM - Edit history (3)

Clearly she can. The point is the issue itself. I'm glad you at least now admit you were mocking. That at least is honest.

To claim you are mocking shoddy arguments is a cop out. You are creating strawwomen and ignoring actual arguments. The shoddiness is your own refusal to deal with what people actually argue.

"Feminists". No, just people advancing certain points of view, who also happen to call themselves "Feminists" but by no means speak for all people who call themselves "Feminists" nor do those points of view represent the totality of "Feminist thought" on the matter. Furthermore, even "mocking" the points of view expressed is not the same thing as mocking Feminism or Feminists-in-general or even the specific people in question, see above

Do you actually think I am a complete idiot and believe all feminists think the same way? You think I can't read, and that I don't read? Yes, I get that the popular version of feminism in some quarters is limited to those issues that make women more sexually available to men. I do not share that view of feminism and am still allowed to call myself a feminist. Men who continue to imply or outright insist those who disagree with them on such issues are not real feminists, in comparison to themselves, reveal very clearly where they stand on women's rights. I really don't care to hear that bullshit. There is extensive literature on the subject of feminism that coincides with the views that the "feminists" you ridicule espouse. There is not so much respected literature from the POV of men who refuse to consider women who don't adhere to their views feminists. Certainly there are women who disagree on all kinds of issues. Whatever they call themselves, I don't give a shit. Invoking them as an excuse to insist those who don't support the neoliberal project aren't real feminists is insulting and reactionary. Clarence Thomas supports revoking the Voting Rights Act. Alan West supports all kinds of positions hostile to civil rights. So what? No single gender or race all thinks alike. Some go out of their way to justify exploitation. They are entitled to their positions as are those who disagree with them.

You did share your support by recing the libertarian thread on prostitution over the others. You showed your opposition to people like me and Ism by mocking us. I am one of the "feminists" who you think not quite a "feminist" because we don't defer to you on all matters. It really is awful when women don't know their place.

Saying you support enforcement of laws is meaningless when you have many times been shown evidence that legalization increases the kind of exploitation I referenced. You insist on theoretical discussions rather than dealing with actual evidence because your position does not conform to reality.

Lastly, never say I'm one to admit an error when I make one. Your point about "feminists" up above proves me wrong.

I wouldn't bother with any of this if I didn't think you were capable of better. Perhaps I'm just wrong about that.

I fault myself for being a slow learner. Plus the comment was on the condescending side. If anything, you have shown yourself remarkably constant on these issues and no doubt know your own mind. I will from now on consider it made up and see you as identical to others who express similar contempt for "feminists" and their views.