Comments by "Charles Eye" (@TheCharleseye) on "Kim Kardashian: Don't Call Me A Feminist" video.

+Gabriel Cowley That "sub-group" makes up the majority of what people see as the "representatives" of the group. When you think of any group, you tend to envision it's most public form. In the case of Feminists, the most public representation is the extremists and nobody is coming out to denounce them. An example of this is the current Republican Presidential candidate. Right now he represents the Republicans in the race. Anyone who sees coverage of him sees the "face of the Republicans." The main difference is that unlike with Feminism, there are plenty of Republicans who publicly denounce Trump for not representing the Party accurately. If "Feminists" don't want "man haters" to represent them, they should say or do something about it. As it stands though, it seems like the majority of Feminists don't have a problem with it.
2
+Gabriel Cowley Whether it seems strange to you or not, it's how things work. We're talking about public perception, not what your responsibilities are. If you are okay with certain people representing a group you belong to, you let them speak for said group. If you are not okay with it, you speak up. You use the example of whether you should speak out against Communists. That depends. Do you feel that Communists are publicly claiming that their brand of "Leftism" is the only true Leftism? Do you think that the public, in general, feels that anyone left of center is a Communist? If so, I would imagine you might have something to say about that. I assume that you don't though, given that you are using this example to try to disprove my statement. Again, this is a perception issue. Feminists are perceived as "man-hating femi-nazis" because they are being represented as such. If it's not up to Feminists to deal with whether or not they're okay with being perceived this way, who do you propose is responsible for dealing with it?
1
+Gabriel Cowley All good points. But consider this: A) Whether the extremists are getting attention by themselves or by "anti's" holding them up as examples, they're still being seen. Denouncing them sends a clear message to all. Staying silent allows everyone to draw their own conclusions as to why you're staying silent. Meanwhile, you take the "high ground" of not directly attacking your opposition. B) If the general populous were able to easily dismiss extremists, ignore the opposition and draw their own conclusions, Feminism would be more popular and we wouldn't be seeing more and more people coming out publicly to ensure the world knows they're not a Feminist... right?
1
+Felix Avenier Careful. You're treading very close to making a "No true Scotsman" claim. The fact is that we don't get to just dismiss our least desirable representatives by simply holding up a dictionary. There are truly off-the-wall people who claim to speak for Feminism. They spew all kinds of nonsense and hate in the name of an ideology that is supposed to be based on equality. They don't adhere to the dictionary definition of Feminism. That doesn't mean they're not Feminists. It just means they're bad Feminists. I guess what I'm trying to say is that actions speak louder than words. At the time of the Crusades, Christianity wasn't a "peaceful religion based on the teachings of a pacifist savior," regardless of what the written definition claimed. It was a religion of fear, hate and genocide. The book didn't change. The people did.
1
+Gabriel Cowley Oh, I'm not saying to accept that it's the most prominent side. Nor am I suggesting launching an assault on extremism. That, in itself, would be extreme. Merely a change in dialogue. For example, rather than just "Feminism isn't about women's superiority" one would say "Feminism isn't about women's superiority, regardless of what [insert extremist] would like you to believe." A simple change but an effective one. Enough of these small clarifications and the extremists will do what they always do: form a new group where they can claim to be right about everything and be supported by their extremist pals. They'll still be lunatics but at least they won't be setting the movement back any more. What's more, they'll draw the fire from the "antis" who currently attack Feminism primarily because of the extremists. The very existence of MRAs proves that the crazies are having a lasting, negative effect. The discussion hasn't really been about equality for quite some time. It's not that people like you and I don't want to talk about equality. It's that the conversation immediately gets dominated by both "Feminists" and "MRAs" who want to shout about how evil the other is. The peaceful are never well served by allowing the violent to speak for them.
1
+Gabriel Cowley Oh, I'm not saying to accept that it's the most prominent side. Nor am I suggesting launching an assault on extremism. That, in itself, would be extreme. Merely a change in dialogue. For example, rather than just "Feminism isn't about women's superiority" one would say "Feminism isn't about women's superiority, regardless of what [insert extremist] would like you to believe." A simple change but an effective one. Enough of these small clarifications and the extremists will do what they always do: form a new group where they can claim to be right about everything and be supported by their extremist pals. They'll still be lunatics but at least they won't be setting the movement back any more. What's more, they'll draw the fire from the "antis" who currently attack Feminism primarily because of the extremists. The very existence of MRAs proves that the crazies are having a lasting, negative effect. The discussion hasn't really been about equality for quite some time. It's not that people like you and I don't want to talk about equality. It's that the conversation immediately gets dominated by both "Feminists" and "MRAs" who want to shout about how evil the other is. The peaceful are never well served by allowing the violent to speak for them.
1
+Gabriel Cowley It's a fine line, indeed. Good talk. I thoroughly enjoyed this exchange. Maybe we'll get lucky and infect the rest of YouTube with civility (though it seems unlikely). Have a great life, friend.
1