[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

OK but then it becomes a bit of a checkbox, doesn't it? Tile insistence that women must lead the discussion... But, inevitably, as women are obviously individuals, it doesn't take much searching for a male to find a female opinion that mirrors their own. So say, for example, you and me had the same or a similar view on a feminist issue that was in direct contradiction to another female's view... It wouldn't be OK for me to say "I don't agree with that, I think ________" because that would be a male disagreeing with a female opinion on feminism (and thus going against the rule that only females may lead the discussion, and so invalid and easily dismissed)..... But it WOULD be OK for me to say "I don't agree with that, I agree with Ammi" because you are female so the counter opinion is now validated? Even if once you peel back a layer, it is EXACTLY the same opinion? It doesn't really make sense to me.

Likewise with BLM, some black people agree with the movement and others do not. It would be a huge - and actually racist - stereotype to say "you must agree with the BLM message because you are black" to a black person. And therefore, all a non-black person has to do to express skepticism of BLM, is say that they agree with a black person who expresses skepticism of BLM.

It all seems a bit convoluted and driven by some sort of "rules system" that I'm not sure anyone ever actually agreed to. It would surely be much quicker to just consider all opinions on all subjects to be equally valid, and then explain why you believe an opinion to be misguided or incorrect.

Maybe that's where the problem lies. People mistakenly believe that acknowledging that an opinion is valid is the same thing as agreeing with that opinion or thinking that it is in any way factually correct. Which isn't the case.

In other words... If I talk **** about a female issue that I clearly have misunderstood, tell me that I'm doing so, by all means. Don't tell me that I'm not allowed to have an opinion in the first place because of some arbitrary birth attribute... Because whilst no, it isn't the same as functional or historical sexism / racism and doesn't "affect me the same way" as those things, it IS still exactly the same mindset as the one that lead to -isms existing in the first place.

Judge the opinion. Discuss the opinion. Try to find common ground. Don't get hung up on the other details. SURELY that is the entire point.

..that’s the thing though, TS...all of what you’ve said I agree with also...and then how do we get there...I mean, how does ‘feminism’ get there...I do think it’s really valid to feel women should have the greater voice as it were and to set the agenda...but then that could, not deliberately but just by its nature...prevent from the greater voices of men, who are great and much needed allies and any progress they could offer...and I guess that goes back to feelings of feminism and the things which still have to be ‘equalled’ being such a slow thing since the start of a movement...