What are the motives for the #metoo witchhunt?

Agree. This is just IdPol: current society sucks edition

Alternative theory: normies are dicks and mob mentality has always been a facet of human society.

Like Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

Are you talking about this?
scientificamerican.com/article/sexual-victimization-by-women-is-more-common-than-previously-known/

Because it just says women are more likely to rape then people usually think, which still goes against idpoller narrative but like come on let's not be intellectually dishonest here.

If this isn't it and you have some other article feel free to post it

You're hitting levels of neoliberalism that I didn't know were possible comrade.

This strikes me as a final attempt by SJWs to keep their the infrastructure of their outrageocracy from shutting down completely after its hilariously embarrassing failure in the 2016 election. Problem is, the fuel they're using to keep the home fires burning are mostly Mangina Feminist Allies™ from their own camp, so it's probably not a very good long-term strategy.

And and and and… Seriously, the MHRM needs to post more hatefacts more places and trigger feminazis harder.

I don't disagree entirely with you Holla Forums but you don't fight IdPol with more IdPol

Until egality is achieved, is pointing out abuses suffered by men really the bad kind of idpol? Feminism was okay back when most of their arguments were backed by statistical reality, it was only their unwillingness to declare victory and shut down that allowed them to be taken over as the permanent outposts of misandrist lezbos & self-hating trannies.

The point is that all of this is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. No it's actively counterproductive. Proles getting at each other throats for made up privileges and rights, while porky is having a blast on the side.

At the end of the day it's the material conditions that count and those will not be fixed by another way of IdPolers screaming in the streets, no matter their type.

This is not to say that we should not attempt to make things better in the meantime, but we should do so knowing that all we achieve while capitalism is still in control is at best a temporary victory. A victory that will most likely be commodified shortly after.

It is what happened to feminism after all. It "won" and now its principles are being used to generate cash. Feminist movies, books, comics… the alt right sees these things as sign that the world has become hostile to men, but in truth this is merely the result of the commodification of a movement that had a brief moment of glory. No feminist is actually being empowered, but their image and ideals are being used as marketing campaigns with little regard of the original message or the actual social situation. It will happen the same to the men's rights movement once it gets its moment of glory.

I sure as hell don't want to be that guy when it comes to le three letter abbreviation people, but these issues aren't a result of postmodern gender politics gaining influence in society. They are directly rooted in the same cultural defects that liberal feminists claim to be critical of. Nothing has really changed, just the rationalizations for maintaining an unjust society. The only exception is boys underperforming in school, and if this was the result of idpol in public policy, that would honestly be an improvement over the myriad of reasons education is horrifying.

Identity politics don't work. Period. Nobody gives a shit how scorned you feel if you lack the maturity to do what makes sense instead of what feels vaguely like revenge. Some of the left's lowest points, both ideologically and practically, are rooted in pure spite over reason.

Yeah, maybe I didn't phrase that quite right. Lemme put it this way: The things the MHRM fight isn't feelz>reelz nonsense or coincidental results of something "inherent in the system" like the feminazis, this is stuff enshrined in law.

Once those laws are repealed, sure. But until then, people need to be made aware of these issues.

Some of them are certainly leftovers from the actual age of patriarchy, but the response of feminists on such issues today uniformly consists of some mix of stonefaced silence, flat-out denialism, spiteful cheering, and attempts to make them even worse. They absolutely deserve all the shit we give them and more.

Your self-awareness is questionable, user.

And again I tell you that all of this is a product of the underlying system that forces proles to fight each other for the crumbs our kind overlords leave around. Do you really think the feminist movement has enough power to force laws over a country? The state is there to protect private property and monopolies, not social and individual rights, those do not move enough money around to bother.
For the same reason we should leave identity politics at home and fight against the real and common oppressor.

Liberated female sexuality basically just makes women all Nazi eugenicists

except they target homeless men, autists, and socially anxious men specifically

The #metoo campaign is partly some weird gaslighting campaign to hide this increasing problem

sorry please explain

Among the people with the most social capital and media power and moneyed interest in Holywood are getting their careers raped, let it happen

I'm just disappointed they aren't fucking going after Woody Allen more

You think that Parisian feminists could have gotten her story published in any modern left journal except spectre rouge? All the others are filled to the brim with feminism. Leftists have worked around this before by writing for the American Conservative (conservative obviously) and the Baffler (populist)

As a progressive force against a truly dangerous enemy, feminism is long dead. As a regressive foothold of powermongering attentionwhores and their armies of white knight betas on culture and politics, feminism is alive and well.

Would you say the same if there were still laws on the books preventing women from (and I'm not implying our problems are anywhere near as bad as theirs were) working, voting, or owning property? Reformism has its limits, but pretending it's worthless is LARP-tier.
Absofuckinglutely.

Honestly it's pretty strange how a lot of white bourgeois women think that flirting is akin to rape.

...

f>ree female sexuality turns out to be the >freedom to be more sexuallly selective

You just explained the entirety of the internet's modus operandi. Including your own. Nobody is really that different.

But he's right though. This society now barely thinks of socially awkward men as human anymore.

You probably know we don't care for them either, but this board isn't for you if you lack the perspective to understand how petty and meaningless these squabble politics really are. Feminism was already bourgeois since the beginning.

Yes that one, rereading the article it says that men and women were equally likely to be sexually assaulted, but I could have sworn it said in the US, and US only, 51 percent of sexual assault victims were men and it was due to our prison system. I’ll try to find that part of the study now.

I guess if you make pretentious yet commercially sucessful movies raping your stepdaughter is ok.

...

The fact that now women despite conquering their "freedom" are still as exploited as men should tell you how much IdPol really does for the common people. We have a few female CEOs I guess, hurray, the rest of the female gender is forced to slave away their life as much as men.
The freedom that they fought to obtain after WW1 turned against them in a sense. Now that capital was able to exploit more labour they are forced to obey the rule of the market.
I have no problem with reformism if it makes you feel better, but this is just a way to divide the working class in arbitrary blocks of privilege and exploitation.
Really? Are you serious now? Maybe it did when the movement was still young, now it's just a bunch of nobodys on Tumblr and marketing teams attempting to catch the last remains of a dying movement.
Read Emma Goldman. She was against the vote for women, because she knew very well that in burgeoise democracy the working class vote means very little.
marxists.org/reference/archive/goldman/works/1911/woman-suffrage.htm

FTA

So men suffer more violent rape than women, which is the laymans definition of rape.

Well, to be fair, Woody Allen just didn't rape his Step Daughter, he married her

Society thinks that of anyone that needs to be exploited. Sexism and racism have their origin in the need for capitalist to have a part of the population free of social protection so that they are free to exploit it without fear of repraisal. Blacks are considered inferior today because the slavers needed an excuse to keep then enslaved. Otherwise the American working man would never have accepted the exploitation of fellow poor workers in the land of freedom.

Culture follows the base. It's the socioeconomic structure that determines the cultural strata of society.

He married the adopted daughter and raped the stepdaughter.

what is reading comprehension

Oh, ok. Thanks for clearing that up

Good job Woody, your mother couldn't have named you better

Yeah, I'm familiar with the divide between the (socialist) women worker movement and the (liberal) suffragettes, and it's certainly a fascinating question as to whether or not the new obligations to work and the economic inability of men to be sole breadwinners has cost women more than they won in terms of freedom and happiness. To be sure, the former rather than latter movement's labor union-focused activism would've turned out better.
How does removing EXPLICIT sexual discrimination from the legal code do any of that? I get it that we have to avoid becoming the monster we fight, but come on.
As if! I'll believe it when Obama's "Dear Colleague Letter" is staked in its coffin with garlic in its putrid mouth, the rape hysteria Star Chambers in universities across America have all been burned to the ground, and the criminals that ran them have all been thrown in jail for the lives they've ruined.

Unanchor this thread NOW

Why is this thread anchored ? Sure, there is a bigger ratio of Holla Forumsyps to regulars than in your average thread, and sex-related threads often end up in a shitfest but that wasn't yet the case, and I was discussing this subject earlier with a friend IRL and it is a pretty interesting and complex issue.
One of the most popular leftist newspapers in France has also been mentioning this in the same perspective on their penultimate cover :

Cuz leftypol decided that no-idpol meant jerking off to wikipedia definitions

...

What happened to anti-feminist-mod, did he go away when board owner sperged out and tried to split the board, enforce new rules etc?

THIS

"socio"economic
then stop anchoring cultural criticism whenever you don't like it

When you make economic policy you can specifically adjust the variables to address all the problems discussed in this thread in enormous ways, if we can't talk of the problems, we won't know how to adjust the variables

Yeah, this is seriously a really good article, I'm surprised. OP did a terrible disservice by quoting the exact faffiest PoMo Freudian nonsense section of the whole thing.

I don't completely disagree some of what she's hinting at, but I'm halfway through and there have been enough moments like these to make me want to just write this off as trash:

so far I do agree with her recurring point that some of these only became crimes in the eyes of the public because the woman in question said she felt uncomfortable, but these are some pretty big reaches.

PS: this is what I wanted to quote, also:

in what fucking Western culture do you live in where a hug from behind isn't at the very least considered quite intimate? or am I just socially retarded or something?

Honestly, it's mostly a pitiful catharsis for women who didn't report or denounce their problem when it happen whether due to threats or being spooked, or did denounce and were ignored. Oh, it's also a great opportunity for SJWs who never knew suffering to virtue-signal.