Yeah. He's a slippery motherfucker. I understand! I went there... once. ONCE!!! ;)

I'm glad I read this thread. I was about to star and say how I agreed with his comment.

I could do that. Or you could just bite me.

It's a site on the internet. The writers may live in America but it's read by people from all over the world. To say it's "an American site" is kind of nonsense. Only about 50% of the readership of Jezebel are America based.

So we're all feminist Communists now? You're an idiot. WTF does wanting equal rights for women have to do with Karl Marx??

THIS is what I like to see!

That last bit...wow, today I learned. I had no idea that attitude was so old. I thought it was a relatively new thing upon the advent of the internet and the newfound ability to have a voice, with the naive posturing that the newfound voice is superior and just been ignored out of ignorance and patriarchal…

As soon as I see his name I flag that shit as spam.

I remembered him from that article about a lesbian couple being harassed in Paris.

They are valid points. But this commenter's sole objective, ERRYWHERE, is to discredit feminism. Not just aspects of it; all of it.

He's an MRA, yes. And a slippery one. He's all reasonable and thoughtful for a while and then something like "so feminism is all bunk and bullshit" happens and BLAMMO, YOU JUST GOT MRA'ed.

You do that. And women of color will continue bearing the dual load of racism and misogyny while dealing with the antipathy of white feminists like you and Steinem.

Being an MRA and "arguing" against the bill. I'm pretty sure that MRAs must also have somewhat diverse political opinions on different issues. Although in this case, I did not see that guy "arguing" against anything. He couldn't care less about the women that would be impacted by the passing of such a bill in Quebec.

On the contrary, this is the most feminist thing I've ever read. You and Steinem are truly kindred spirits.

In the rest of the world we don't do it like that, "by default". When talking about the history of stuff we usually contextualize it in a global manner, unless, of course, we are talking of local history, and when we do that, we try to be specific. But that's fine, you do you, it has worked wonders so far, hasn't it?

I'm sorry what the fresh hell is this comment?

Sure they could have, and should have, helped you in your struggle 10, 30, 50 years ago. The good news is that they are helping you now.

Plus they always want to call critiques, especially from black women, "attacks." If we point out their racism, we are somehow threatening them, and apparently we're supposed to be excited and be pack mules for initiatives that will only benefit them.

No we do not need to back each other up no matter what, that is not feminism. If a feminist says something racist or something a lot of us think is wrong we should call them and not ignore it, being a feminist does not mean we have to agree with everything a feminist says. It is funny how this always comes up when a…

the White middle-class part of the movement got reported more,