Why “Anti” Is Disingenuous

I had an interesting discussion with a friend of mine who has been having a confrontation with a couple of, what I can only call misogynistic douche bags, from the Manhood Academy site. We were talking about people who call themselves anti-feminists and that got me to thinking about labeling yourself “anti” anything.

I have a real problem with people and groups who are “anti” anything. I prefer people and groups who are “pro” things because not it is only more positive, but it is more truthful (ok I am sure you can think of things like pro-baby eating, but that’s just being silly!). Calling yourself anti-feminist is disingenuous; by rights they should be calling themselves pro-female bigotry and pro-sexual inequality, because that is the reality of their beliefs.

If we start referring to people and groups who call themselves “anti” whatever as “pro” what they really are about, I think it would help clarify things and force these people to defend their real beliefs, which are most often indefensible.

Take for example, since we’ve already mentioned it, anti-feminists. They try to portray feminists as man hating, sex despising fanatics, which is far from the reality. If we start calling them pro-sexual inequality or pro-male domination, then they are suddenly forced to defend these positions.

When we can reframe the argument so that the reality of peoples views and beliefs becomes obvious, then we are calling these misogynists for what they really are; woman hating, insecure fear mongers.


10 thoughts on “Why “Anti” Is Disingenuous

  1. Just the notion that someone felt the need to create a “Manhood Academy” is sad.

    I love the juxtaposition of misogyny and a feminine hygiene product.

    I am anti-death penalty. How else should I describe that so I can put a more positive spin on it?? Certainly not pro-life……

    • There are just something that you can be “anti” about that are pretty clear, but still, being pro makes you really think. It is sad that pro-life has been co-opted by the anti-abortion people, especially since many of them are pro-death penalty, which is ironic.

  2. I agree. My point would be: Be Anti when Anti is the strongest (and most accurate) statement and be Pro when pro is the strongest(and most accurate)statement.

    I am pro-choice (strongest statement. I am anti-death penalty (strongest statement). By the way, my anti-death penalty stance has NOTHING to do with sanctity of life ect. I don’t believe there is anything that has an inherent “sanctity”, but that is not a discussion to be had here.

    I agree that the “anti-feminists” are really pro-male dominance etc.

    I guess we can’t expect them to stand up and say that though.

    Keep up the rants. They are if nothing else fun to read and do provoke thought.

    • *nods*

      Jay’s really caused me to think on this one, too. I’m “anti-extremism”, which I guess can be defined as “pro-moderation” ~ but that doesn’t really define it either. I am adamantly and fiercely pro-choice.

      My reply to Jay, though, sums up where my thoughts are right the moment with respect to the so-called “Manhood Academy” ~ I’m not opposed to anyone (including hateful people) expressing their views, up to the point that they violate others’ rights. Those guys? They try to deny it via “explicit” language of “don’t [do this action] since it’s illegal” …but the implicit language advocates emotional and psychological abuse. *siiiiigh*

  3. Oh…the commentary in the Academy gets better. To the point I wrote a letter to the ISP and to the LAPD.

    The “Dean of Beatdowns” ~ Professor Plum ~ tracked back to my storm-artists account and lifted a few of my images -INCLUDING one of my infant son!!-

    …so yeah. Right now, I guess you could say I’m anti-“Manhood Academy” or pro-“shutting down Manhood Academy” as a HATE GROUP.

      • I don’t know. Hmm. That’s an interesting thought – I have no desire to “frighten” anyone…having survived abuse, I’m not keen on being abusive toward others. I do, however, hold people accountable for what they do. The words, themselves, don’t bother me so much – though I recognize where those words can incite violence toward women (which I find repugnant); though I feel no personal threat at this time (they’re clear across the country) – but I am watching, admittedly, with guarded eyes.

        I know, personally, how my ex reacted to my (finally) reporting him to the police – and the reaction was nothing short of psychotic. In that situation, I was terrified for my personal safety. I suspect that is the aim of these guys – to create a *silencing* situation in others…and I refuse to allow even an implicit threat (via use of pictures “letting me know”) silence me.

  4. It is not a direct threat, no. And I won’t claim that it is. Thing is, having been through 12 years of that? I recognize the symptomology of implicit threat to create “silencing” of behaviors…in an “I found you…watch out” sort of way.

    The link to the specific dialog -while/if it remains in the public domain- is here: http://manhood101.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=341

    It is quite grotesque. And I am NOT being silent about it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s