Poll: Are you a feminist?

[Epona]

Your response seems to be, "I can't be bothered to point out the faults of AA".

I have limited time and energy. I figure, arguing against affirmative action is a waste of time; it's complaining about a symptom and frankly, I sound like an entitled little jerk when I whine about discrimination, being that I'm a white heterosexual cisgendered middle class American. It's like... I'm complaining?

Wrong, there is nothing "entitled" about pointing out racism and sexism.

Perhaps not in a vacuum, no. But we're not in one. All things must be taken with context, and there is nothing sadder than privileged white dudes (and you can't take that away from me; I get to decide if I'm privileged, at the very least) complaining about discrimination against them. I freely admit that I have no idea what I'm talking about because that's just not a world I live in.

So, in your mind, all discrimination against males is justified?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Feminist means a very simple thing... equality.

The ideas of Valerie Solanas in her book, "SCUM Manifesto" say otherwise. The ideas [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Daly#Views_on_men] of Mary Daly are also against the idea of equality.

That's all it has ever meant.

I just wouldn't choose or not choose to hire a person based on the M or F in the gender field of an application (in Canada employers can't put a "gender" box on applications for this reason). That's all.

Well that is good to hear.

Just... please... don't back out and say you're "not a feminist" just because you don't like some of the more unpleasant people that identify as such. "I'm not a feminist, but I believe in equality" doesn't make any sense.

Sure it does, I don't want to associate with violent bigots like Valerie Solanas. So while I'm for equality, I don't identify as a feminist.

You're still a feminist, by definition, because you believe in the equality of the sexes. I understand; I wouldn't want to be grouped together with some of those people either, but it's in the name of reaching a goal of changing the way we think of gender and eliminating prejudice.

You say you understand, but then you go back and try to convince me why i should associate with a group that has some members that wouldn't mind putting me in a unequal position in society.

Apparently if you are white and/or male, you aren't allowed to have an opinion but then....who is oppressed at that point?

Native Americans, I mean try to read [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.381770-Women-Only-parking-in-Germany?page=4] the [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.382164-Civilization-and-the-forgotten-people?page=1] subjects [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/528.382143-senate-bill-2109#15072655] that Lil devils x has described in regards to Native Americans and not feel depressed.

 

[Epona]

I think anytime a certain groups opinions don't count it's oppression. Women only parking, women only subways (Japan I think). I guess if women want it, segregation is a good thing again.

Women want to participate in everything men do but then they want their own spaces where men aren't allowed. Is there a reason most people turn their heads to this?

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Perhaps not in a vacuum, no. But we're not in one. All things must be taken with context, and there is nothing sadder than privileged white dudes (and you can't take that away from me; I get to decide if I'm privileged, at the very least) complaining about discrimination against them.

There is nothing sad about people pointing out how there is a system that actively disqualifies them because of their race or gender. Whether the person who is pointing this out is White or Black, male or female, does not matter. As for you, that's fine, but don't assume that all White males have said privileges(see:White West-Virginian men).

I freely admit that I have no idea what I'm talking about because that's just not a world I live in.

Then go and educate yourself on what it feels like to be discriminated against.

 

[PrototypeC]

Feminist means a very simple thing... equality.

The ideas of Valerie Solanas in her book, "SCUM Manifesto" say otherwise. The ideas [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Daly#Views_on_men] of Mary Daly are also against the idea of equality.

That's all it has ever meant.

WRONG WRONG WRONG WROOOOOONG

Oh yeah, that's still funny after all these years. /sarcasm The word has been abused, and you are clearly very aware of that part of it, but you can't accept the actual definition? I told you, horrible people will hide behind that word, use it as a shield. That does not make it worthless. Let me elaborate...

Just... please... don't back out and say you're "not a feminist" just because you don't like some of the more unpleasant people that identify as such. "I'm not a feminist, but I believe in equality" doesn't make any sense.

Sure it does, I don't want to associate with violent bigots like Valerie Solanas. So while I'm for equality, I don't identify as a feminist.

You say you understand, but then you go back and try to convince me why i should associate with a group that has some members that wouldn't mind putting me in a unequal position in society.

I'm not backpedaling on this. My point stands; no group or word for a group should be judged based on their worst members. These are the types of people I was talking about. I didn't want to name names, but eh.

A lot of people are very happy being called a, "gamer" because it brings a sense of pride, a sense of community. It means that we share a hobby or a belief. Would you really like to be judged based on some racist, sexist, homophobic, screechy 13-year-old kid from Utah who won't stop running his mouth? Would you like to be judged based on some kid from Korea who just stopped eating and drinking until he died because he couldn't pull himself away from his game for ten minutes? I sure wouldn't.

People like Mary Daly are the screechy 13-year-old kids of us feminists. They besmirch the name. Technically, they are against the very idea of gender equality, which is what the term is all about. This does not make me feel any less strongly about the equality of the sexes, and sure, I'd like to back out and mumble excuses about how I don't want to be associated with X person. However, gender equality is too important. Yes, even more important than the respect of video games as a medium.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I'm not backpedaling on this. My point stands; no group or word for a group should be judged based on their worst members. These are the types of people I was talking about. I didn't want to name names, but eh.

Honest question[footnote]I apologize if this comes off as condescending[/footnote], do you truly believe that? I mean what about the Men's Rights Advocacy groups? Would you say that it would be wrong for them to be judged for the actions of some of their sexist members?

A lot of people are very happy being called a, "gamer" because it brings a sense of pride, a sense of community. It means that we share a hobby or a belief. Would you really like to be judged based on some racist, sexist, homophobic, screechy 13-year-old kid from Utah who won't stop running his mouth? Would you like to be judged based on some kid from Korea who just stopped eating and drinking until he died because he couldn't pull himself away from his game for ten minutes? I sure wouldn't.

Don't get me wrong, I don't only associate feminism with people like Mary Daly, Erin Pizzey is a very respectable feminist.

People like Mary Daly are the screechy 13-year-old kids of us feminists. They besmirch the name. Technically, they are against the very idea of gender equality, which is what the term is all about. This does not make me feel any less strongly about the equality of the sexes, and sure, I'd like to back out and mumble excuses about how I don't want to be associated with X person. However, gender equality is too important. Yes, even more important than the respect of video games as a medium.

I agree gender equality is important, I just don't like how feminism is white knighted and people(not you) are hostile to any criticism of it.

 

[ShadowStar42]

The ideas of Valerie Solanas in her book, "SCUM Manifesto" say otherwise. The ideas [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Daly#Views_on_men] of Mary Daly are also against the idea of equality.

Wow, so you just can't associate yourself with any group or thing then can you? I mean, there isn't a group out there with more than a couple hundred members that doesn't have at least one nutjob or terrible person in it. And since one person within a group with a fringe definition as to what that group means/stands for is all that it takes for you to condemn it lets have some fun and get you to disavow some more.

Gamer Someone who supports excessive violence and criminal activity as the appropriate response to almost any stimulus. I mean the majority of games are situationist and contain violence, animal cruelty, and often clearly illegal acts.

Human A member of the true inheritor species of this planet, distinguished by light skin tone, small nose (in comparison to the lesser, non-human races) and superior intellect. See also; Aryan, Homo-Sapiens, Homo-Inferior. This has been the fundamental belief of a number of cultures, I'm sure you can find other similar beliefs in non-White cultures as well.

Since I assume you're not an idiot I have to assume also that had you put any thought into your position that you would have realized how ridiculous it is. Just wanted to point out the glaring holes so you can either focus yourself on a new argument as to why you don't consider yourself a feminist or at least admit to yourself that people like Valerie Solanas have nothing to do with it.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

Since I assume you're not an idiot I have to assume also that had you put any thought into your position that you would have realized how ridiculous it is. Just wanted to point out the glaring holes so you can either focus yourself on a new argument as to why you don't consider yourself a feminist or at least admit to yourself that people like Valerie Solanas have nothing to do with it.

Valerie Solanas has to do with Feminism, and no amount of no-True-Scotsman fallacies will change that.
You want another reason? Ok, one reason would be that I don't hear many feminist leaders denouncing people like Mary Daly, and as such I have to ask, "why not?" . If people like her are against mainstream Feminism's messages, why not publicly denounce them? A second reason would be that the word has a gender bias. If it was to be changed to something more gender neutral, then I would be behind it.

 

[itsthesheppy]

Your response seems to be, "I can't be bothered to point out the faults of AA".

I have limited time and energy. I figure, arguing against affirmative action is a waste of time; it's complaining about a symptom and frankly, I sound like an entitled little jerk when I whine about discrimination, being that I'm a white heterosexual cisgendered middle class American. It's like... I'm complaining?

Wrong, there is nothing "entitled" about pointing out racism and sexism.

Perhaps not in a vacuum, no. But we're not in one. All things must be taken with context, and there is nothing sadder than privileged white dudes (and you can't take that away from me; I get to decide if I'm privileged, at the very least) complaining about discrimination against them. I freely admit that I have no idea what I'm talking about because that's just not a world I live in.

So, in your mind, all discrimination against males is justified?

No, never. But there's degrees here. My resources of indignant rage are limited and I choose to spend that energy where it can do the most good, and I choose not to spend it whining to the underprivileged that this one thing is sort of unfair. I would rather dedicate my energy towards criticizing what I see as much more severe forms of discrimination that still exist that affect other people.

Perhaps not in a vacuum, no. But we're not in one. All things must be taken with context, and there is nothing sadder than privileged white dudes (and you can't take that away from me; I get to decide if I'm privileged, at the very least) complaining about discrimination against them.

There is nothing sad about people pointing out how there is a system that actively disqualifies them because of their race or gender. Whether the person who is pointing this out is White or Black, male or female, does not matter. As for you, that's fine, but don't assume that all White males have said privileges(see:White West-Virginian men).

I freely admit that I have no idea what I'm talking about because that's just not a world I live in.

Then go and educate yourself on what it feels like to be discriminated against.

That's a weak comeback. Go educate myself? What, go get my skin pigmentation altered? Have a sex change operation? It's not like you can go read a book writing by someone who experienced apartheid or 1950's southern racism and suddenly I'll be on their level of understanding.

The stance you seem to possess is that there is zero tolerance for this stuff; even the slightest discrimination demands the fullest measure of resistance and contempt. But that is inconsistent with your stance on feminism that you have displayed in other threads. I don't think you are holding yourself to the standards you appear to be holding me to, here, and I'm wondering if you're not just blowing so much hot air to be contrary. Or selfish.

Oh, when it's about white men suddenly there's zero tolerance, but when it's about, say, women, well there's gray areas, doncha know, it's not as bad as it seems, there's arguments on both sides, etc etc.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

That's a weak comeback. Go educate myself? What, go get my skin pigmentation altered? Have a sex change operation? It's not like you can go read a book writing by someone who experienced apartheid or 1950's southern racism and suddenly I'll be on their level of understanding.

I didn't say that you would be on equal understanding of them, just that you would be more educated on the matter.

The stance you seem to possess is that there is zero tolerance for this stuff; even the slightest discrimination demands the fullest measure of resistance and contempt. But that is inconsistent with your stance on feminism that you have displayed in other threads. I don't think you are holding yourself to the standards you appear to be holding me to, here, and I'm wondering if you're not just blowing so much hot air to be contrary.

Please elaborate about my conduct in other threads. That said, how nice of you to try to turn this on me instead of criticize AA.

Or selfish.

....lol.

Oh, when it's about white men suddenly there's zero tolerance, but when it's about, say, women, well there's gray areas, doncha know, it's not as bad as it seems, there's arguments on both sides, etc etc.

Nice strawman, I never said that "its not as bad as it seems" for women. Try again.

 

[itsthesheppy]

That's a weak comeback. Go educate myself? What, go get my skin pigmentation altered? Have a sex change operation? It's not like you can go read a book writing by someone who experienced apartheid or 1950's southern racism and suddenly I'll be on their level of understanding.

I didn't say that you would be on equal understanding of them, just that you would be more educated on the matter.

The stance you seem to possess is that there is zero tolerance for this stuff; even the slightest discrimination demands the fullest measure of resistance and contempt. But that is inconsistent with your stance on feminism that you have displayed in other threads. I don't think you are holding yourself to the standards you appear to be holding me to, here, and I'm wondering if you're not just blowing so much hot air to be contrary.

Please elaborate about my conduct in other threads. That said, how nice of you to try to turn this on me instead of criticize AA.

Or selfish.

....lol.

Oh, when it's about white men suddenly there's zero tolerance, but when it's about, say, women, well there's gray areas, doncha know, it's not as bad as it seems, there's arguments on both sides, etc etc.

Nice strawman, I never said that "its not as bad as it seems" for women. Try again.

I'm making this about you because you made it about me. Not so fun when the other guy swings the spotlight around on you? What I am getting at is this; I feel you're a hypocrite. Espousing zero tolerance when there's the slightest discrimination against you or the group with whom you identify, but willing to play devil's advocate and explore gray areas and downplay the severity of discrimination against others.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

I'm making this about you because you made it about me.

Well that is silly to do.

Not so fun when the other guy swings the spotlight around on you?

I don't mind, that is why I didn't dodge your comment about what I do on other threads and I actually asked you to elaborate. However your still dodging what I'm saying about AA being flawed.

What I am getting at is this; I feel you're a hypocrite.

Please prove proof of this.

Espousing zero tolerance when there's the slightest discrimination against you or the group with whom you identify, but willing to play devil's advocate and explore gray areas and downplay the severity of discrimination against others.

When did I explore the gray area against women being discriminated against?

 

[Rastrelly]

Equalty between pen and pencil is unreachable. There are human rights (both males and females are human), but that's it. Men and women are in fact rather different species with different social and natural functions. Equalty in rights between male and female - sure thing. Equalty in duties - definitely. Each right must be supported by duty. Everything else is bullcrap.

 

[Schadrach]

To go along with that, women should also have to sign up for Selective Service and they should be drafted in equal numbers. Equality works both ways.

We haven't actually drafted anyone in the US in a long time, even though we maintain all the process necessary to. We also haven't charged anyone for draft dodging in a long time either. Instead it's tied to federal student aid and voter registration.

I read something the other day about Title IX being used to restrict the number of men who get into college for science.

Quotas limiting the number of male students in science may be imposed by the Education Department in 2013. The White House has promised that ?new guidelines will also be issued to grant-receiving universities and colleges? spelling out ?Title IX rules in the science, technology, engineering and math fields.? These guidelines will likely echo existing Title IX guidelines that restrict men?s percentage of intercollegiate athletes to their percentage in overall student bodies, thus reducing the overall number of intercollegiate athletes.

http://www.openmarket.org/2012/07/10/quotas-limiting-male-science-enrollment-the-new-liberal-war-on-science/

Just another example of anti-male discrimination but men won't protest and feminists aren't interested in fighting discrimination against males.

I don't see a source saying exactly what they're going to do in there, just sites speculating using other sites speculating as evidence. I would not be surprised if they did put such a quota on men in the majors in which men routinely outnumber and outperform women. I would be shocked, however, if a quota were put on women in parts of education where women outnumber and outperform men. After all, the point of a law requiring anti-discrimination in education is to benefit only women, right? There seemed to be an awful lot who felt that way about that boy on a girls' field hockey team in NY recently.

A lot of people are very happy being called a, "gamer" because it brings a sense of pride, a sense of community. It means that we share a hobby or a belief. Would you really like to be judged based on some racist, sexist, homophobic, screechy 13-year-old kid from Utah who won't stop running his mouth? Would you like to be judged based on some kid from Korea who just stopped eating and drinking until he died because he couldn't pull himself away from his game for ten minutes? I sure wouldn't.

I thought instead we were supposed to be judged on vast hordes of internet trolls who will attack targets because it sounds entertaining, and what they do if you specifically go out of your way to piss them off.

People like Mary Daly are the screechy 13-year-old kids of us feminists. They besmirch the name. Technically, they are against the very idea of gender equality, which is what the term is all about. This does not make me feel any less strongly about the equality of the sexes, and sure, I'd like to back out and mumble excuses about how I don't want to be associated with X person. However, gender equality is too important.

Yet Daly was considered very influential, and Solanas practically created radical feminism (she didn't self identify as feminists, and the reasons she didn't resonated with some feminists and radical feminism was the result). Isn't it a bit disingenuous to claim people who were influential within a movement as not really being part of it?

Yes, even more important than the respect of video games as a medium.

Speaking of which, one thing I've had trouble with: One of the core arguments from gamers is the whole violence in media doesn't cause actual violence thing. How do the feminists in the audience manage to hold that view and "rape culture" at the same time without contradiction? It seems like the entire concept of rape culture is explicitly contradictory, unless rape is "magic" somehow.

Don't get me wrong, I don't only associate feminism with people like Mary Daly, Erin Pizzey is a very respectable feminist.

It's worth noting that neither Pizzey nor Solanas self-identified as feminist, but for practically opposite reasons. Both have been claimed by feminists from time to time as well.

Pizzey was also practically thrown out of her own movement (she founded the first women's refuge, and was a big part of the early domestic violence shelter movement) once the "feminists" got involved (these would be the predecessors of the trans-exclusive radical feminists who are often in charge of DV shelters today). In no small part because she wanted to help male victims too.

 

[Josue Rodriguez]

I don't identify as feminist because the word holds lots of different connotations depending on whom you ask, and I believe I shouldn't have to specify that I want the sexes to be equal. It should be the default position.

Yeah pretty much this. I'm not an activist but I believe women should have equal opportunity and rights as men and visa versa. Pretty simply really.

That's quite a feminist thing to say. Just saying.

 

[MrMan999]

To go along with that, women should also have to sign up for Selective Service and they should be drafted in equal numbers. Equality works both ways.

We haven't actually drafted anyone in the US in a long time, even though we maintain all the process necessary to. We also haven't charged anyone for draft dodging in a long time either. Instead it's tied to federal student aid and voter registration.

I read something the other day about Title IX being used to restrict the number of men who get into college for science.

Quotas limiting the number of male students in science may be imposed by the Education Department in 2013. The White House has promised that ?new guidelines will also be issued to grant-receiving universities and colleges? spelling out ?Title IX rules in the science, technology, engineering and math fields.? These guidelines will likely echo existing Title IX guidelines that restrict men?s percentage of intercollegiate athletes to their percentage in overall student bodies, thus reducing the overall number of intercollegiate athletes.

http://www.openmarket.org/2012/07/10/quotas-limiting-male-science-enrollment-the-new-liberal-war-on-science/

Just another example of anti-male discrimination but men won't protest and feminists aren't interested in fighting discrimination against males.

I don't see a source saying exactly what they're going to do in there, just sites speculating using other sites speculating as evidence. I would not be surprised if they did put such a quota on men in the majors in which men routinely outnumber and outperform women. I would be shocked, however, if a quota were put on women in parts of education where women outnumber and outperform men. After all, the point of a law requiring anti-discrimination in education is to benefit only women, right? There seemed to be an awful lot who felt that way about that boy on a girls' field hockey team in NY recently.

A lot of people are very happy being called a, "gamer" because it brings a sense of pride, a sense of community. It means that we share a hobby or a belief. Would you really like to be judged based on some racist, sexist, homophobic, screechy 13-year-old kid from Utah who won't stop running his mouth? Would you like to be judged based on some kid from Korea who just stopped eating and drinking until he died because he couldn't pull himself away from his game for ten minutes? I sure wouldn't.

I thought instead we were supposed to be judged on vast hordes of internet trolls who will attack targets because it sounds entertaining, and what they do if you specifically go out of your way to piss them off.

People like Mary Daly are the screechy 13-year-old kids of us feminists. They besmirch the name. Technically, they are against the very idea of gender equality, which is what the term is all about. This does not make me feel any less strongly about the equality of the sexes, and sure, I'd like to back out and mumble excuses about how I don't want to be associated with X person. However, gender equality is too important.

Yet Daly was considered very influential, and Solanas practically created radical feminism (she didn't self identify as feminists, and the reasons she didn't resonated with some feminists and radical feminism was the result). Isn't it a bit disingenuous to claim people who were influential within a movement as not really being part of it?

Yes, even more important than the respect of video games as a medium.

Speaking of which, one thing I've had trouble with: One of the core arguments from gamers is the whole violence in media doesn't cause actual violence thing. How do the feminists in the audience manage to hold that view and "rape culture" at the same time without contradiction? It seems like the entire concept of rape culture is explicitly contradictory, unless rape is "magic" somehow.

Don't get me wrong, I don't only associate feminism with people like Mary Daly, Erin Pizzey is a very respectable feminist.

It's worth noting that neither Pizzey nor Solanas self-identified as feminist, but for practically opposite reasons. Both have been claimed by feminists from time to time as well.

Pizzey was also practically thrown out of her own movement (she founded the first women's refuge, and was a big part of the early domestic violence shelter movement) once the "feminists" got involved (these would be the predecessors of the trans-exclusive radical feminists who are often in charge of DV shelters today). In no small part because she wanted to help male victims too.

Wasn't the SCUMM Manifesto Satire?

 

[Darkmantle]

snip

Wasn't the SCUMM Manifesto Satire?

You would think, but then she ran off and shot her male publisher and got thrown in the loony bin for a bit, so judging by her mental state, it was totally legit.

and she is praised as a great feminist Icon.

now that's sick.



here, I just copy pasted from the SCUM wikipedia page

""Various critics and scholars have analyzed the Manifesto and Solanas's statements regarding it. Prof. Dana Heller said the author had an "anarchic social vision"[37] and the Manifesto had "near-utopian theories"[38] and a "utopian vision of a world in which mechanization and systems of mass (re)production would render work, sexual intercourse, and the money system obsolete."[39] According to Village Voice reviewer B. Ruby Rich, "SCUM was an uncompromising global vision",[9] in the Manifesto criticizing men for many faults including war and not curing disease; many but not all points were "quite accurate"""

Emphasis mine.

EDIT: other fun bits

Atkinson (according to Rich) calling Solanas the "'first outstanding champion of women's rights'

and is also "credited with beginning the antipornography movement

 

[Darkmantle]

snip

Pizzey was also practically thrown out of her own movement (she founded the first women's refuge, and was a big part of the early domestic violence shelter movement) once the "feminists" got involved (these would be the predecessors of the trans-exclusive radical feminists who are often in charge of DV shelters today). In no small part because she wanted to help male victims too.

That's basically why I'll never Identify as a feminist. A woman who should be a feminist icon is tossed out because she wanted to help everybody, while the lady who wrote the SCUM manifesto is praised by many.

Feminism would really have to sort itself out before I take part in it.

 

[Kahunaburger]

snip

Wasn't the SCUMM Manifesto Satire?

You would think, but then she ran off and shot her male publisher and got thrown in the loony bin for a bit, so judging by her mental state, it was totally legit.

and she is praised as a great feminist Icon.

now that's sick.



here, I just copy pasted from the SCUM wikipedia page

""Various critics and scholars have analyzed the Manifesto and Solanas's statements regarding it. Prof. Dana Heller said the author had an "anarchic social vision"[37] and the Manifesto had "near-utopian theories"[38] and a "utopian vision of a world in which mechanization and systems of mass (re)production would render work, sexual intercourse, and the money system obsolete."[39] According to Village Voice reviewer B. Ruby Rich, "SCUM was an uncompromising global vision",[9] in the Manifesto criticizing men for many faults including war and not curing disease; many but not all points were "quite accurate"""

Emphasis mine.

EDIT: other fun bits

Atkinson (according to Rich) calling Solanas the "'first outstanding champion of women's rights'

and is also "credited with beginning the antipornography movement

BRB, grabbing info about the Taliban and unironically citing it as representative of the men's rights movement.

 

[Darkmantle]

snip

Wasn't the SCUMM Manifesto Satire?

You would think, but then she ran off and shot her male publisher and got thrown in the loony bin for a bit, so judging by her mental state, it was totally legit.

and she is praised as a great feminist Icon.

now that's sick.



here, I just copy pasted from the SCUM wikipedia page

""Various critics and scholars have analyzed the Manifesto and Solanas's statements regarding it. Prof. Dana Heller said the author had an "anarchic social vision"[37] and the Manifesto had "near-utopian theories"[38] and a "utopian vision of a world in which mechanization and systems of mass (re)production would render work, sexual intercourse, and the money system obsolete."[39] According to Village Voice reviewer B. Ruby Rich, "SCUM was an uncompromising global vision",[9] in the Manifesto criticizing men for many faults including war and not curing disease; many but not all points were "quite accurate"""

Emphasis mine.

EDIT: other fun bits

Atkinson (according to Rich) calling Solanas the "'first outstanding champion of women's rights'

and is also "credited with beginning the antipornography movement

BRB, grabbing info about the Taliban and unironically citing it as representative of the men's rights movement.

Hardly the same. Now if you called the Taliban a "parody" or "satire" I would also be forced to bring up some facts about them showing that no really, they are serious. Even if you think it was silly, it wasn't satire to her or (obviously) the people who took her as an idol. Trying to make it out as a joke, that she was in on, is just dishonest.

reading comprehension is a good skill though.

just sayin.