I think what it comes down to is that some people (myself included) are finding it hard to give the benefit of the doubt here when the character defence being offered so closely parallels what's been said in the past in defence of brazen male perverts.
That said, I think you've hit the nail on the head regarding in and out groups, and we should simply be looking at this as: a person has been wronged here, what's the appropriate response?
There's a reason the law as written doesn't discriminate offences on race or gender.
I'm in the journalism industry, and have seen time and time again one-sided mob psychology suffocate anyone even considering to constructively criticize the movement.
If you can't admit just how extremist and tribal the current atmosphere is, I don't think you're going to be able to appreciate the perspective of the person you're replying to.
I see a lot of healthy debate and constructive criticism within feminism.
You're just restating my point back to me. Remember when I said this: "Hypocrites abound. In fact everyone holds some conflicting views/acts in ways that work against their self interest. It's human nature. But not everyone who you disagree with is a hypocrite. Hell,some of them aren't even objectively wrong! But if you only exist in an in-group vs. out-group mindset you're going to miss some great points."
That's the same thing as admitting that tribal behavior is a problem. My whole POINT is that the tribal behavior/generalized statements (like "all feminists") creates a breakdown in the discussion.
I'm still a feminist though, and other than learning one woman's story I genuinely don't understand what was supposed to happen here.
This isn't a debate between 2 equal factions, as you've seemed to cast it: it was a Stalinist style purge of all who didn't hold the correct opinions; with the same people who committed the purge, still in control today.
I'm still a feminist, and I still don't understand why I can't be a feminist and also believe the story I just told. The fact that "mainstream feminism" ostracized Pizzey has nothing to do with my personal beliefs. I guess I'm not a mainstream feminist?
Is this mainstream?: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/01/19/feminism-inte...
This is pretty close to me.
FWIW, I think very few people exist as absolutes but typically shades of grey. IDK what "good" or "bad" people are anymore, just good or bad actions. Promoting equality is something I find to be a good action. That is what I feel feminism represents (or should represent, or represents to me).
Your wide brush is counterproductive to the "logical and open" discussion here. The whole point of the article that you read in its entirety and internalized before commenting upon it was that this is difficult for some people to accept: a champion of women's rights was perpetrating the crimes she seemed to be fighting against. Reconciling these truths is difficult for some people, and some people who worked closely with this woman will come to defense of her character as they knew her.
Hypocrites abound. In fact everyone holds some conflicting views/acts in ways that work against their self interest. It's human nature. But not everyone who you disagree with is a hypocrite. Hell,some of them aren't even objectively wrong! But if you only exist in an in-group vs. out-group mindset you're going to miss some great points.
TL;dr- Title IX is great, and it seems like this woman is both a renowned academic AND a sexual abuser.