How dare I argue against women-haters instead of just agreeing with whatever they say. Deanna will tell you what’s what!
Fellow men like Francois Tremblay, who repeatedly use violent and/or paternalistic language in response to women disagreeing with them, bring up a question I want to discuss: what level of tolerance should there be for expressions of hatred from self-styled “male allies” against women who they believe are falsely claiming to be feminists (or are “pro-BDSM, pro-porn or pro-prostitution,” or the like)?…
If you, a totally radical-feminist-allied dude who, can “talk back” to (as in, slur, hate on, violently address) women who are not radical enough for your sensibilities, what stops a self-identified “sex-positive feminist” man (I talked to one of those today, it was awful) from watching you and thinking “if it’s men’s place to insult and swear at women who are doing feminism wrong, that means I can harass the SWERFs and TERFs at will!”?
And what if you’re wrong? Imagine for a moment that you are not the Obelisk of Objectivity and that the basic principle of skepticism does in fact imply the possibility that the feminists you agree with (in Tremblay’s case, self-identified radical feminists) could be wrong about whatever it is you believe the other women are wrong about.
Oh no, what if I’m wrong? I’ve never thought about that before! And what if bigoted assholes decide to say mean things because… they saw me do it? (since when do bigoted assholes need MOTIVATION?).