Okay, so the real life section was pulled, and the Troper Tales were axed. Most agree on the page of this trope that it is about a fictional character who takes feminism too far and falls into misandry, often for a satirical effect by the author.

However, you see this potholed for almost every girl who Does Not Like Men, or for the obnoxious female Fan Dumb with the "Real Women Never Wear Dresses" attitude who may, or may not, claim to be an actual "feminist", usually so the editor can pull a Take That. This might be because some tropers interpret the disclaimer of "Straw feminists don't exist in real life" as stating "Straw feminists don't exist in real life because nobody in the real world takes feminism so far" rather than that they are for satirical use, which they strongly disagree with.

The misuse isn't limited to the wicks, either. I've seen the term "Straw feminist" used across the internet, by pretty much anyone who isn't 'edgy' enough to say "feminazi".

Plenty of tropes are misused in potholes, but I feel like this one needs a TRSD.

edited 8th May '11 6:06:58 PM by RabbitFuneral

Yea, sadly I think the word "satire" isn't clicking with people.

Clean up any wicks that are on pages where the character is not written as a feminist primarily or only to make the point that feminism is bad. That's the trope. That's what "straw" means in the trope name.

It's not about how militant or radical their feminism is. They simply have to be a strawman version — a version that is set up solely to be knocked down.

edited 8th May '11 9:28:32 PM by Madrugada

Ok - so this might sound a little pedantic, but seeing as we already have a "Straw Misogynist" trope - shouldn't this be called the "Straw Misandrist" trope? It's just that if you are pro-women to the point of being anti-men, by definition you are no longer a feminist - you are a MISANDRIST. Its just strikes me as a misinterpretation of the word "feminist" because what feminism really means is equality between the genders. It's only seen as pro-women because that's who it started with.

Straw Feminist is perfectly correct. The works that use this trope aren't interested in being fair to feminism. They're trying to portray feminists as man-hating female supremacists.

That's a frequent technique, but there are other characterizations employed. The straw feminist may evidence no opinions of men whatsoever, but be drawn as unethical or ugly or having poor hygiene or any other negative trait.

The trait of man-hating is examined in Does Not Like Men.

edited 14th May '11 5:04:53 PM by FastEddie

What Straw Feminists try to do is depict that Feminsts are Misandrists.

edited 14th May '11 7:00:21 PM by SakurazakiSetsuna

Straw Feminist is a preexisting term that you run across occasionally on feminist blogs that refers to the stereotypical man-hater that enemies of feminism always try to argue against.

It means something very similar to "feminazi", but you won't hear actual feminists use that term for obvious reasons.

Don't know why people are having a hard time with this very simple idea. It is not about man-hating. It is about setting up a 'feminist' to knock over — in any of a number of ways.

I suppose this could be considered a criticism of Straw-Anything but...

Does this mean you can't create a character that critiques feminism without him/her being a Straw Feminist?

Sure, you can create a character that critiques. Strawmanning is the practice of making a character that is a critique by being wrong, or easily demeaned.

edited 15th May '11 1:33:35 PM by FastEddie

^^^ It's because Straw Feminist is a cooler name than Does Not Like Men. I'm not being snarky, that's really the reason. It doesn't help that there's overlap.

^^ What I mean is creating a feminist character who illustrates the logical problems of feminism.

What I'm getting from all this is that any criticism of feminism is Straw Feminist, which makes feminism the only viewpoint ever that cannot be questioned.

Then you aren't listening to what has been said repeatedly.

A feminist character is only a Straw Feminist, if the feminism is set up for the sole purpose by being knocked down or demonstrated to be wrong.

Well, there you go.

Feminism can't be wrong? And be demonstrated to be wrong through a character without that character being a Straw Feminist?

The definition is no different than that of Strawman Fallacy, except with "Feminism" substituted for "any argument or political position". Why is this so hard to get?

Then that should be reflected in the definition.

A Straw Feminist isn't just a feminist character that exists precisely to critique feminism; it's a feminist character that exists to critique a Straw version of feminism.

Put bluntly: No. If you prove feminism wrong, you are proving women are worth less than men. Good luck with that.

In theory, it's possible. But forty years of Real Life discussion tell us it's unlikely.

EDIT: Ninja'ed

edited 30th May '11 7:52:04 PM by Discar

"If you prove feminism wrong, you are proving women are worth less than men."

What if I believe that women are not worth less then men but don't believe in Patriarchy? Or historic female oppression?

Or if I believe that a focus on female victimhood is limiting to women, both socially and psychologically? And that I've found some potentially serious systemic errors in the feminist victimhood narrative (for one a lack of research into or interest in the victimization of men)?

edited 30th May '11 8:58:24 PM by MercuryInRetrograde

...then I'd suggest you not post any further on the subject.

Just a tip.

Right. How about I create a character that demonstrates that s/he thinks feminism, unlike any social philosophy in the history of humanity, is beyond criticism.

Would that still be a Straw Feminist?

Of course it would.

Here, let me demonstrate the concept to you:

"How about I create a character that demonstrates that s/he thinks <insert philosophy here>, unlike any social philosophy in the history of humanity, is beyond criticism. "

Hmmm, that's kind of confusing. A Straw anything is a character created to be wrong, right? So, if Mercury had a feminist character who was there to be disproven, then I think they'd be a Straw Feminist regardless of the particularly views they were made to express.

The person is created (or held up as an example) to be wrong its more created to show the opposition view (which is most of the time the POV characters) is correct.

At least that's the way I have always understood it.

edited 30th May '11 10:26:24 PM by Raso

What I want to know is, why does this one keep getting misused (i.e. calling real-life extremist feminists Straw Feminists), but no-one that I've seen refers to real-life political extremists (left or right wing) as Strawman Political?

edited 31st May '11 1:34:10 AM by DoktorvonEurotrash