Is use of the term 'feminazi' to describe feminists ridiculous?

[angus]

The term was popularized by Rush Limbaugh to breed divisiveness and polarization, which helps his ratings. The Nazis strongly opposed feminism and advocated the singular role of the woman as a "breeder" and child-care provider.

Feminists have their firmly held views but so does everyone else. This does not warrant calling them a 'nazi'. Also, I consider myself a supporter of their goals so calling feminists Nazis means calling myself a Nazi! Really ridiculous.

Feminism can and should be ridiculed at every opportunity.  and I rarely waste one.  But, turn about is fair play.  Anyone ridiculing anyone else is probably subject to some ridicule.  Still, I vote no, it's not ridiculous, since I interpret "ridiculous" as "inciting ridicule spontaneously" and it doesn't occur to me to ridicule the logical.  But it does occur to me to spontaneously ridicule feminists.  I should admit that I ridicule masculinists just as much, to be fair.  I ridicule pretty much everybody, especially those who take Rush Limbaugh too seriously.  

[angus]

I actually hadn't realized that Limbaugh coined, or at least popularized, the phrase.  You're probably right about it being silly, but he's a silly man.  That said, once coined, it stuck.  I use the term often on this forum.  I think it's apt.  As far as Limbaugh.  He's a joke.  It's meant to be a joke.  He's having fun and getting rich having fun.  No harm.  No foul.  I bear him no grudge.

[angus]

I just want to interrupt for a moment and say to Milk and Cereal that I'm in complete agreement with your original post.  I also agree that whether you "hate women" is irrelevant to the question.  That said, I have seen no evidence that you hate women.  Or men. 

Point is, if you're an egalitarian, then there's already a long-established word for that:  egalitarian.  No need to invent some yuppie, or orwellian, newspeak word for it.  The forced and uncomfortable popularization of the term "feminist" is creepy, and probably underscores a darker agenda, as MilkandCereal suggests.  And the term they've chosen, feminism, is creepier still, as it makes clear to the wise, in no uncertain terms, what that anti-egalitarian agenda is.  But apparently this alacrity is lost on the groupthinkers.  (thus "creepy", and intentionally so.)

That said, I say the same nasty things about masculinists as well.  And that certainly shouldn't be taken as a sign that I "hate men"  After all, my father was a man, and I loved him very much.  Like my mother, he was an egalitarian and raised me that way.  Perhaps being raised to treat all humans equally is one reason that I, and presumably MilkandCereal, do not have a deeply etched urge to either overcompensate for gender-bigotry (by claiming to be "feminists") or to attain some yuppie substitute for wisdom by putting our brains on the self in favor of the less controversial groupthink.

This is an Emperor's New Clothes moment.  You are mostly in denial.  We are not.

[angus]

It is a demeaning and spiteful term used by a few right wing males who need to say these things in order to make themselves feel superior in some way.

But the term "male chauvinist pig" is perfectly OK?

I said that where?

Maybe YOU didn't, but the term "feminazi" is basically payback for men being called that by radical feminists.  It's a great irony, since the radical feminists are basically female chauvinist pigs, the mirror image of the male chauvinists they so reviled.

Do you agree that "male chauvinist pig" is also a demeaning and spiteful term also?

Of course i do.

I think it's more analoguous to female chauvinist sow, though.

You'd need masculinazi as an exact aesthetic and syntactical counterpart for feminazi.  But it's culturally irrelevant, since the term "masculinism" hasn't caught on the way feminism has, which is nice, as it means the egalitarians aren't fighting a two-front battle.