But if you are correct about the comment seabeyond is posting about, it seems to me that it ought to be acknowledged that there is a bit of hyperbole going on in both directions.
My summary - trying to be as neutral as I can be:
seabeyond made a post hypothesizing that the speaker might not be a woman and might not understand that women often experience things differently than men.
Neoma characterizes that suggestion as declaring the gender of the speaker and claiming the speaker's opinions are not valid because the speaker is not male.
seabeyond describes Neoma's characterization as stating sebeyond hates men.
seabeyond made a relatively innocuous statement, and a valid observation by any feminist standards I am aware of. The standard feminist mantra used to be "the personal is political" - that is what that mantra means - our politics as feminists are informed by our experiences, and we experience life differently than we would if we were men.
To Neoma - Perhaps seabeyond's observation could be misinterpreted- but it is hyperbole to read the statement as denying that men's opinions are valid (or claming any knowledge of the speaker's gender).
To seabeyond - You are correct - what you said does not match Neoma's interpretation of it. BUT, it is also hyperbole to read her incorrect interpretation as saying you hate men.
redqueen has wisely asked everyone to stand down. I am only adding this because it seems to me that the hyperbole in this exchange is being described as one sided, and my observation is that it is mutual - and describing it as one sided only serves to keep the pot simmering.
Now I'll crawl back in my bunker.
= new reply since forum marked as read