Extremists

<body topmargin=0 leftmargin=0 marginheight=0 marginwidth=0><script type="text/javascript" src="http://hb.lycos.com/hb.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://ratings.lycos.com/ratings/lycosRating.js.php"></script> <script type="text/javascript"><![CDATA[//><!]]></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://scripts.lycos.com/catman/init.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://members.tripod.com/adm/ad/code-start.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://members.tripod.com/adm/ad/code-middle.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://members.tripod.com/adm/ad/code-end.js"></script> <noscript> <img src="http://members.tripod.com/adm/img/common/ot_noscript.gif?rand=912213" alt="" width="1" height="1" />  <iframe frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" width="728" height="90" src="http://ad.yieldmanager.com/st?ad_type=iframe&ad_size=728x90&section=209094"></iframe>  </noscript> <table cellpadding=0 cellspacing=0 border=0 height="100%"><tr> <td valign="top" width=160 BGCOLOR="#FFFBF0" TEXT="#080000" background="067f0f03.jpg"> <div> <A HREF="index.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Sex War"><U><B>Sex War</b></U></A></div> <div>  <A HREF="id5.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Essays"><U><B>Essays</b></U></A></div> <bR> <div> <A HREF="id35.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="What is a Hate Movement?"><U>What is a Hate Movement?</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id50.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Just Sex War"><U>Just Sex War</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id129.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Equity feminism a contradiction "><U>Equity feminism - a contradiction </U></A></div> <div> <B>Extremists</b></div> <div> <A HREF="id52.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="No Good Feminists?"><U>No Good Feminists?</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id132.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="The average feminist"><U>The average feminist</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id54.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Profeminism"><U>Pro-feminism</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id55.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Jokes"><U>Jokes</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id45.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Magic Y chromosome"><U>Magic Y chromosome</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id48.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="My Definition"><U>My Definition</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id41.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Censorship"><U>Censorship</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id44.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Once Upon A Time..."><U>Once Upon A Time...</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id60.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Lesbian Separatism"><U>Lesbian Separatism</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id62.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="51"><U>51%</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id46.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Humpty Dumpty Feminism"><U>Humpty Dumpty Feminism</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id63.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Child of the Glacier"><U>Child of the Glacier</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id133.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Open Letter to Mens Activists"><U>Open Letter to Men's "Activists"</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id135.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="A Letter to the Mounties"><U>A Letter to the Mounties</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id140.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Having your cake and eat it"><U>Having your cake and eat it</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id141.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Women are children"><U>Women are children</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id143.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="A criticism of iFeminism"><U>A criticism of iFeminism</U></A></div> <div> <A HREF="id147.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="Male DV victims"><U>Male DV victims</U></A></div> <bR> </td> <td valign="top" BGCOLOR="#CCCC99" TEXT="#080000" bgproperties="fixed" background="068f0f03.jpg"> <div> <B>Extremists</b></div> <bR> <bR> <div> If there was ever one favorite excuse for feminist sexism it is this: </div> <div> "<B>Of course there are </b><I><B>some</b></I><B> extremists...</b>" </div> <bR> <div> As with many slogans the phrase does not invite any sort of critical analysis. It's never followed by evidence, and no challenge is expected. It's a given. All movements have <I>extremists</I>. Everyone knows that! What could you possibly say to argue against such a self-evident fact? It might even be said that its a <B>healthy</b> thing for a movement. Well.... is it?</div> <bR> <div> Movements do have extremists, but in what sense is the word used by feminists? An <I>extremist</I> within a movement is someone who <B>agrees</b> with the movement's essential tenets but emphasizes them beyond the norm, until their views begin to conflict with common sense or the law. Often condemned or criticized by their own side they are a minority view, which is often an embarrassment, but can also express ideas in a purer form which the mainstream might latter endorse fully.</div> <bR> <div> Now let us look at how this favorite feminist excuse uses the term. Typically they will be replying to an accusation that feminism is not an egalitarian movement. Perhaps examples of specific feminists making obviously sexist comments like "<A HREF="id51.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="All Men Are Rapists"><U>All Men Are Rapists</U></A>". They admit that some "extremists" are obviously not interested in sexual equality, but that these people do not represent real feminism. </div> <bR> <div> The flaw here is that extremists <B>do</b> believe in their movements' issues. Passionately. Hence "extreme". But feminists call people "extremists" when they don't believe in sexual equality at all. These people (e.g. Marilyn French, <A HREF="http://www.carnell.com/feminism/andrea_dworkin/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.carnell.com/feminism/andrea_d"><U>Andrea Dworkin</U></A>, <A HREF="http://www.carnell.com/feminism/catharine_mackinnon/index.html" TARGET="_top" TITLE="http://www.carnell.com/feminism/catharin"><U>Catharine MacKinnon</U></A>, <A HREF="id53.htm" TARGET="_top" TITLE="S.C.U.M."><U>Valarie Solanas</U></A>, etc., and groups such as NOW) are not dismissed as unrepresentative of feminism for wanting equality <B>too much</b> but for not wanting it <B>at all</b>! They are not extreme-egalitarian they are anti-egalitarian. If feminism were about equality these people would be condemned as <B>enemies of</b><B> </b><B>feminism</b>.</div> <bR> <div> Two explanations are possible for this confusion by feminists between 'extremist' and 'enemy'. The first is that they don't know what the word extremist means and genuinely believe that all movements contain people, even popular leaders, who are openly working precisely <B>against</b> the aims of the movement.</div> <bR> <div> The second explanation is that, yes, these people really are feminist extremists, but that feminism is not interested in equality -- only in women. Then they fit the meaning of <I>extremist</I> very well. They are pro-woman as all feminists are, but they take it too far. Unfortunately this second explanation, most likely the true explanation, contradicts what the feminist apologetic was trying to say -- that feminism is not just about women, rather it is about sexual equality; both sexes. </div> <bR> <bR> <div> All movements have extremists within them, true, but how many movements have enemies? Popular people within them who are actually <B>opposing</b> the very basis of the movement? This is the fiction feminists are trying to foist when they say, "Oh yes there are sexist feminists but they are <B>just extremists.</b>". Anti-male bigotry is a natural and tolerated result of a movement that is biased towards women, but would be inexplicable and anathema in a genuine sexual equality movement. </div> <bR> <div> For example, the pro-life movement has <I>extremists</I> who break the law to harass women seeking abortions. But these <I>extremists</I> are often denounced by other pro-lifers. They are not leaders in the movement. And most importantly these extremists <B>are actually pro-life</b> in their views. There are no enemies in positions of leadership. Peter Singer for example, is not somehow thought to be pro-life. </div> <bR> <div> The animal rights movement has <I>extremists</I> who threaten scientists involved in animal experiments. Respectable animal rights groups disassociate from these tactics. But no one doubts that these terrorists are interested in animal rights. </div> <bR> <div> Feminist extremists are telling us something about feminism. They are telling us that <B>open bigotry against men is an acceptable philosophy for a feminist</b>. They are telling us that feminism is not an equality movement even in theory, but <B>at best</b> a movement within which equality is tolerated alongside its opposite.</div> <bR> <bR> <div> What would a genuine egalitarian extremist look like? For one thing they would probably risk breaking the law for their cause. But what we usually mean by <I>extremist</I> is someone who goes <B>too far</b> in the right direction. How can you want too much equality? Is it even possible? I think it is. I think an egalitarian goes too far if they become procrustean. </div> <bR> <div> The word comes from an ancient mythological Greek bandit, Procrustes, who was so committed to equality that he would lengthen his victims on the rack, or cut them down to equal size by removing their feet. As an example, today we could say someone was procrustean if they demanded that since women have the right to demand abortion over the wishes of the father, that a father should have the same equal right to demand that the mother have an abortion, over <I>her</I> wishes -- or else neither one should have the right.</div> <bR> <div> I don't think I've ever met someone who said this seriously unless they were pro-life in the first place! True egalitarian extremists must be very rare indeed. </div> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <bR> <div>     <p align="center"> <A HREF="http://rd1.hitbox.com/rd?acct=WQ5011298NZC45EN0&p=s"> <IMG SRC="http://hg1.hitbox.com/HG?hc=wf153&l=y&hb=WQ5011298NZC45EN0&cd=1&n=Extremists" height=62 width=88 ALT="Click Here!" border=0> </A> </p>    </div> </td> </tr></table></body>