For the record (Twitter was a poor medium for explaining this) I also have no beef with you - I just unfollowed because practically, seeing Shanley's tweets in my feed just makes my life less good by rubbing in my face that such people exist and have influence in the world. I can't do anything about the fact that people choose to follow anger, hatred and fear - but I can at least opt out of seeing those followers across my path.
The mute feature isn't quite enough for this, since naturally people who follow Shanley will tend to retweet other related topics that have the same tenor. So unfortunately the best thing for my blood pressure is to simply unfollow people who have joined this movement.
Which is all a big shame, because I am a fervent believer in equality (gender or otherwise), and am just as violently opposed to people who discriminate against or insult women just because they're women as Shanley is. However, I am equally hostile to people who discriminate against or insult men just because they're men.
The article itself mentions disliking engaging with moderate voices as an attempt to silence more strident voices, and I get where that's coming from, but some of the people with more strident voices are hate-filled hypocrites.
I see no harm in promoting the thoughtful stuff (like this article) and ignoring the angry noise.
I don't think anyone should be forced to listen to anything they don't want to. I'm just adding some context, not making a value judgement. I block the hell out of people on Twitter.
As an aside, Twitter's new-ish mute feature solves that problem. If someone you don't like is being retweeted by someone that you do, you can mute the person being retweeted without affecting the other content from the person you follow.
I've seen those kinds of more extreme articles (and writers) on modelviewculture before, so I think it's fair to judge a publication by what it publishes. And some of these talking points were adopted by ultra-feminists.
Somebody stating their views based on past experiences interacting with the community the authors are part of is something other readers might be interested in. See the post by "226jg5" below.
If you don't believe the article deserves the association, please elaborate on why that is the case.
One of the many problems feminism has faced is the lumping in of extremists with more moderates with all sorts of other splinter views; it's to be expected that your work may face the same criticisms.
There is no "ultra-feminist movement"; feminism is an umbrella term for a multitude of movements across time and geography. Each movement is understood within a context, and some take more time to understand than others. I would suggest the book Gender Inequality by Judith Lorber as a starting point.
Funny, I live with a college-age daughter who is an outspoken and studious third-wave feminist, and has been politically active since she was ten years old. She doesn't talk about radfem at all, or anything close to the "ultra-feminist" caricature. The third wave feminism I listen to constantly is about correcting the limitations of second wave feminism (Gloria Steinem style) and expanding our awareness and acceptance of more fluid gender roles in today's society. Nothing radical about it.
You're misinformed. "Radical" in "radical feminism" doesn't mean, has nothing to do with, "ultra"; it means a very specific strain of ideas, far from third-wave feminism.
Most people who feel animosity to feminists are attacking a caricature of them that can't be said to meaningfully exist. It also usually involves a misclassification of anger at a bad situation with 'hate.'
The fact that you can read something like this article and connect it to anything hateful, let alone angry (it's not either) shows why many feminists get frustrated even talking about inequality: people aren't listening to what's being said, their demonstrating faulty thinking and prejudices, often while denying they exist.
Read through https://twitter.com/shanley - give it a good hour. You'll come out thinking that you've experienced an alternate dimension, in which all men are evil, all women are victims who need to fight against the oppressor, and the only way forward is some kind of violent revolution, probably accompanied with mass executions of some sort.
Yeah, and every time someone like you objects to them, moderate feminists spring forward to insist that they're "straw feminists", that you imagined the whole thing, and that even thinking such feminists exist proves you really just have an axe to grind against feminism. I've even been accused of attacking a straw feminist for (accurately) criticising the views of someone who was incredibly popular amongst that group of feminists for exactly those views. Even if only a small proportion of feminists hold fucked up views, almost all of them are part of the problem by shielding those extremists from criticism.
Anyway it is important to recognize that you can advocate for gender equal rights without labeling yourself "feminist"—or allowing feminists to force that baggage-laden label upon you against your own will.
I still don't like the ultra-feminist movement though. Hate doesn't achieve much good.