Support NeoGAF

[kame-sennin]

That trolling for being in the wrong section stuff is tired.


Feminist is such a loaded word now, I'd rather go with your description of who i am than to attribute any of it to feminism.

By definition, feminism is "The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men".

I'm a feminist and so is my missus. If I said that to her, she'd react like a scalded cat. For many people, feminist has some negative connotations.

We can thank the Christian right for that.

Don't know where you are from, but here in Germany women already have equal rights.

I'm from the U.S.

 

[Daydream Sequence]

I know this isn't true for me, because I often describe myself as being feminine

I don't get why you feel the need to define yourself at all. Won't your actions accurately portray what, and who you are?

 

[dude]

Don't know where you are from, but here in Germany women already have equal rights.

Women also have equal rights in the US, that doesn't mean there's no discrimination, even in Germany:
http://www.spiegel.de/international...ns-between-german-men-and-women-a-682026.html

 

[Dead Man]

I think the label of feminist carries too many negative connotations for lots of men who actually support the goal of modern feminism to want to label themselves as such. I know it may be a bit silly, but I like egalitarian.

 

[Gustav]

Women also have equal rights in the US, that doesn't mean there's no discrimination, even in Germany:
http://www.spiegel.de/international...ns-between-german-men-and-women-a-682026.html

He said he fights for equal rights.

 

[Dead Man]

I identify as such when asked. No matter what anybody says, too much evidence points to everybody but middle aged white males still getting the shitty end.

Exactly, so why narrow the label to a section of those getting the shaft.

 

[Akainu]

Women also have equal rights in the US, that doesn't mean there's no discrimination, even in Germany:
http://www.spiegel.de/international...ns-between-german-men-and-women-a-682026.html

Unless I'm reading over it that article doesn't even cite anything and it even points to more women working part time jobs.

Seriously are there any mra feminist in here?

 

[kame-sennin]

That's pretty broad, and I don't really think it's true.

I think a more likely reason why men wouldn't actively define themselves as feminist is because they're not comfortable having a claim on the word. They don't know if it's appropriate.

It's not really that hard to find out. Asking a feminist or searching on google will quickly turn up all the info that's needed.

It doesn't help that there are some outspoken ultra-feminists can be openly hostile towards men. If a guy goes around talking about feminism, he might be worried that he will attract ire and scorn from women despite having good intentions.

I've never seen or experienced such a thing.

 

[Zekes!]

I don't get why you feel the need to define yourself at all. Won't your actions accurately portray what, and who you are?

I'm not defining myself, I simply use it as a descriptive term when describing myself with words

 

[Timedog]

I stopped being a "feminist" the moment I realized the entire feminist movement had been subverted from its actual purpose of equal rights for women as WOMEN. I'm sure that the women's suffrage movement of the day would look at what their hard work has earned them and start CRYING about how misinterpreted their intentions were.

Who subverted the entire feminist movement? Please provide links.

I'm totally not expecting you to reply to this post with anything substantial, but feel free to prove me wrong.

 

[kame-sennin]

Exactly, so why narrow the label to a section of those getting the shaft.

I don't think you can have a positive effect in the battle for equal rights without clearly identifying who faces oppression (and who benefits from unearned privilege). Feminism refers to women in order to draw attention to the inequality that women face.

 

[Mesoian]

I've never seen or experienced such a thing.

You should go back and read some of the post thoughts from Finkel-gate. Most guys who actually tried to put time and effort into their responses were lumped into the childish obscenity knee-jerk grouping, all out ignored, or lambasted because "how dare you criticize my opinion when you're just like all the other guys!"

When actual gender discrimination occurs, men, even when speaking firmly and logically, very rarely look good when the dust settles.

 

[-KRS-]

If that's what feminists look like they're alright in my book, because that's a pretty sick ass pipe right there! More feminists should smoke a pipe.

 

[Mumei]

Labels that define a community tend to prevent independent thought. At least I think so. You're free to disagree.

They can have that effect (witness the partisan effect here) but you should know that there is a lot of variety in feminist (and relatedly queer theorist) thought.

I think that problem is more likely if your identification is based on some sort of sense of tribalism rather than on a set of principles.

Feminism is about grappling with an enormous and ancient societal idea -- that there are two gender roles, with certain strict and non-optional behavioral characteristics, and that people should fit those roles. (Or, for short, the patriarchy.) It was called feminism because the earliest activists advocating it were women, but in reality, any guy who doesn't want to be an emotionally repressed, sexually aggressive, physically focused man is just as affected by the patriarchy. And yes, that means most men in the world have felt the pressure of the patriarchy to conform, just as most women have -- even some of the men that do conform probably don't really want to, just as some women who fall into traditional female stereotypes probably do so to escape the pressures of society. (If women happened to advocate feminism first, it's probably because "doing things" was not considered a traditional female characteristic, so it was kind of a necessary first step to everything else.) This also means every gay person, every trans person, anybody with any sort of deviation from the two ironclad old-fashioned gender roles, are all dealing with essentially the same feminist pressures. This is historically a very difficult concept to get across, but fundamentally I believe it -- and it means not only that I'm a feminist, but that most people are. They just maybe don't know it yet.

Perfect.

You should like this. I think that a lot of men who dislike feminism fail to realize that a lot of their "But what about men having these issues!" rebuttals are issues that are explained by and would be improved by feminist goals.

I think that feminism has broadened a lot from its beginnings to now where it is better described as an anti-kyriarchical movement that has become concerned with issues of class and race (and other things like ableism, etc) as the intersectionality of various social categories became better known. I think that there's room for - in fact a necessity for - men's issues to be addressed in that framework as well.

But a lot of men hear "feminism" and think "So it's just about women?" It's easy to see how the mistake is made, but it's an overly narrow understanding.

It's not really that hard to find out. Asking a feminist or searching on google will quickly turn up all the info that's needed.

Are you suggesting that there's a blog called Finally, A Feminism 101 blog? Surely not.

 

[Yaboosh]

If that's what feminists look like they're alright in my book, because that's a pretty sick ass pipe right there! More feminists should smoke a pipe.

Pretty sure that is a mouth pipe dude.

 

[Dead Man]

Because its not one or the other. I am a feminist. I also enjoy eating steaks, having shits that go well, and sunny days.

If its a conversation about feminism, I'm not going to stop it and say, "woah bro, don't use that term, let's now talk about classism and anti-bullying and defending people who like to eat trans fats."

I think it is more useful to be inclusive rather than exclusive in language. That way the fight does not have to be fought multiple times if you want the same thing for different groups. Want to help women, racial minorities, youg people, and the poor? Why not do it all at once if you can?

I don't think you can have a positive effect in the battle for equal rights without clearly identifying who faces oppression (and who benefits from unearned privilege). Feminism refers to women in order to draw attention to the inequality that women face.

I think this attitude is too conflictory, it doesn't help to identify those that on average gain priveledge, the fight should be to ensure everyone has that priveledge. If you name groups as having unearned priveledge, there will always be members of those groups who react against this, sometimes the least priveledged members of the group. If you say middle aged white males have privelegde, which I do not dispute, there will be plenty of people who are poor, or disabled, or gay, or whatever and still belong to that group without having seen much of the priveledge.

Addressing who has priveledge is only useful to establish what priveledge is. After that, the task is to ensure everyone enjoys it.

Bloody hell I'm bored at work today

 

[Ventrue]

EDIT: I swore I would never argue about feminism on the internet...

 

[SmokyDave]

As evidenced by the numerous "DON'T CALL ME THAT!" responses in this very thread.

I think it's because many people 'discover' feminism during their college years and as with most things discovered in college years, the concept is then used inappropriately to batter people over the head.

Once people understand the real goals and aims of feminism I find they're far more receptive to the whole shebang.

 

[Dead Man]

I think that feminism has broadened a lot from its beginnings to now where it is better described as an anti-kyriarchical movement that has become concerned with issues of class and race (and other things like ableism, etc) as the intersectionality of various social categories became better known. I think that there's room for - in fact a necessity for - men's issues to be addressed in that framework as well.

But a lot of men hear "feminism" and think "So it's just about women?" It's easy to see how the mistake is made, but it's an overly narrow understanding.

As always, you say it better than me. That is the reason I don't call myself a feminist. I understand why people do, but to those with little education in the area (like me) it sounds too exclusive.

 

[SuperBonk]

They can have that effect (witness the partisan effect here) but you should know that there is a lot of variety in feminist (and relatedly queer theorist) thought.

I think that problem is more likely if your identification is based on some sort of sense of tribalism rather than on a set of principles.

Right. In my original post I said that I tend not to label myself feminist not only because of any potential negative connotations (really, this would only make me want to use it more in an attempt to educate people) but also because I do not know the exact details of the movement and ideologies.

It's one thing to have someone misinterpret what you're saying, and it's another to not even be able to correct that misinterpretation.

 

[-KRS-]

Pretty sure that is a mouth pipe dude.

lol. that hyphen is easy to forget sometimes.

 

[Devolution]

I'll admit that my argument was a bit simplistic, but I do think that people who espouse the same views as you are appropriating feminism to be something it isn't. I'm not sure if it's a misguided attempt to rebuff criticism of "radical" feminism, but feminism is clearly about women. I think your claim is ridiculous, and as such I used a simplistic argument to ridicule it.

Feminism isn't just about women. The movement was about getting women more equal pay, rights, and defining sexual harassment but the current goals are to continue to dismantle gender roles and unfair treatment of both genders by a structure that imposes rigidly defined molds for both women and men. The pigeon-holing of women into various jobs and stereotypes hasn't gone without negative repercussions against men, especially homosexuals and those who don't fit into the narrow definition of "manhood"/masculine.

 

[Mumei]

As always, you say it better than me. That is the reason I don't call myself a feminist. I understand why people do, but to those with little education in the area (like me) it sounds too exclusive.

Well, I think you should call yourself a feminist to counteract that impression.

This is a good book for an introduction to the idea that feminism is about more than just women, but about systems of domination generally. It assumes that you are familiar with some of the core principles of feminism, and it makes reference to another one of her books (Feminist Theory: From Margin to Center), but for a ~120 page introduction to feminism and how it got to this point now and where it went wrong, what it did right, growing pains related to class and race, etc, I thought it was spot on.

Right. In my original post I said that I tend not to label myself feminist not only because of any potential negative connotations (really, this would only make me want to use it more in an attempt to educate people) but also because I do not know the exact details of the movement and ideologies.

I haven't had a chance to read it myself (library doesn't have it; not in my budget), but Stumples recommended this when I asked him for a good introduction to feminist thought.

Maybe your library has it, if you're interested.

 

[kame-sennin]

I think this attitude is too conflictory, it doesn't help to identify those that on average gain priveledge, the fight should be to ensure everyone has that priveledge. If you name groups as having unearned priveledge, there will always be members of those groups who react against this, sometimes the least priveledged members of the group. If you say middle aged white males have privelegde, which I do not dispute, there will be plenty of people who are poor, or disabled, or gay, or whatever and still belong to that group without having seen much of the priveledge.

Addressing who has priveledge is only useful to establish what priveledge is. After that, the task is to ensure everyone enjoys it.

Yea, people with privilege seem to get rilled up when you point it out. But the onus is on the individual to not be offended by the statement of fact. Pointing out unearned privilege is important if you want to dismantle that privilege and the corresponding oppression. You can't fight what you do not name.

 

[travisbickle]

I'm a feminist marxist post-consumerist digger 2012 humanist, man.

 

[Devolution]

If you balk at labeling yourself a feminist, congrats you've let the right/anti-feminists demonize the word to a point where you are afraid to own it.

 

[SuperBonk]

I haven't had a chance to read it myself (library doesn't have it; not in my budget), but Stumples recommended this when I asked him for a good introduction to feminist thought.

Maybe your library has it, if you're interested.

Thanks, that seems pretty comprehensive.

 

[SmokyDave]

If you balk at labeling yourself a feminist, congrats you've let the right/anti-feminists demonize the word to a point where you are afraid to own it.

Radical feminism carries no blame?

 

[Devolution]

Radical feminism carries no blame?

There's radical everything.

 

[antipod]

I really don't like the word feminism so I wouldn't call myself one. While some would probably count me as one there are so many 'so-called' feminists that write articles for newspapers and the net that I just can't agree with. They are just plain stupid, make anti-male arguments and rather hurt their cause than the other way around.

I like the word 'ekvivalist' someone tried to spread here in Sweden a couple of years ago and I guess the english version would be equivalist. Egalitarianism as a word is better too, just a bit too long.

 

[speedpop]

I grew up in a single parent family run by a female firebrand. My mother worked her arse off in her restaurant for 5 kids, and being the 2nd eldest meant that I was sandwiched between an older and younger sister. This easily led to me having nothing but devout respect for the mindset and advice of females. They offer much more than they are warranted in many circles, and I am of the opinion that the world would be far better off with governments run with female heads of state and we are slowly getting there already. "Behind every great man lies an even greater woman," as the quotes might say - probably why Nikola Tesla was forgotten in time because he never bothered to find a companion who would tell him to bite the bullet and sort out his life's work for future documentation purposes.

That won't change the fact that I still believe that males get hard done by in family court unless the circumstances side 100% with the male. My partner's cousin-in-law is a lawyer who deals in family court issues and you can see the stress and strain on his face. It truly is a sticky situation.

Don't know if I could identify myself as a feminist. More a humanist than anything else.

 

[Mumei]

Radical feminism carries no blame?

You should read that book I suggested to Dead Man. It's about ~120 pages; you can read it in an afternoon.

But you and I have had this discussion, so you know how I feel about it.

 

[SmokyDave]

There's radical everything.

That's not an answer.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

I'd consider myself a feminist, absolutely. I've never really understood why so many people say so while also trying to distance themselves from the "crazy ones" or whatever. It's sad that feminists, anime fans, rights activists, etc are pushed to constantly reassure everyone else that they're not unreasonable wingnuts. So many positions and groups are demonized before unaware folks even have a chance to understand issues for themselves. It's like we assume that everyone with a position is a member of the KKK or an active Nazi soldier.

 

[Deleted member 20920]

Feminism is about grappling with an enormous and ancient societal idea -- that there are two gender roles, with certain strict and non-optional behavioral characteristics, and that people should fit those roles. (Or, for short, the patriarchy.) It was called feminism because the earliest activists advocating it were women, but in reality, any guy who doesn't want to be an emotionally repressed, sexually aggressive, physically focused man is just as affected by the patriarchy. And yes, that means most men in the world have felt the pressure of the patriarchy to conform, just as most women have -- even some of the men that do conform probably don't really want to, just as some women who fall into traditional female stereotypes probably do so to escape the pressures of society. (If women happened to advocate feminism first, it's probably because "doing things" was not considered a traditional female characteristic, so it was kind of a necessary first step to everything else.) This also means every gay person, every trans person, anybody with any sort of deviation from the two ironclad old-fashioned gender roles, are all dealing with essentially the same feminist pressures. This is historically a very difficult concept to get across, but fundamentally I believe it -- and it means not only that I'm a feminist, but that most people are. They just maybe don't know it yet.

Bravo for summing it up so well.

I was once in a disussion with this classmate of mine. She was quite sure that men cannot be legitimate feminists and I told her that men are subjected to the same patriachial chains that bond women. She just went on about how men are nontheless privilleged even if they're oppressed and I just couldn't go on and gave up trying to convince her because she either failed to see my point or chose to ignore it...

 

[Devolution]

That's not an answer.

Yes it is. People don't distance themselves as much from political stances/labels and there are plenty of radicals as well as much more violence/damaging rhetoric.

 

[Mesoian]

If you balk at labeling yourself a feminist, congrats you've let the right/anti-feminists demonize the word to a point where you are afraid to own it.

Then they need a better PR person, because everyone I see actively, aggressively touting the label of feminist seems to be doing a pretty good job making the argument against being one. I don't care about the politics of it, I get tired of "feminists" raising the rally flag against things they don't know and labeling it sexist or sexism without a full understanding of what it really is. I'm tired of "Feminists" putting more emphesis on why disney princesses are bad for society and saying nothing about women who are actually doing something in their respective places in life. I haven't seen one "feminist" blog even mention Marissa Mayer today. That's fucking dumb.

"Feminists" destroyed the term feminism and are doing more harm to the feminist movement then the right ever did.

 

[Mumei]

That's not an answer.

I think her point was that there are radicals in any social movement (or political party), but it was the demonization of feminism that has given people the impression that those radical feminists are representative of feminism as a whole.

 

[Devolution]

Then they need a better PR person, because everyone I see actively, aggressively touting the label of feminist seems to be doing a pretty good job making the argument against being one. I don't care about the politics of it, I get tired of "feminists" raising the rally flag against things they don't know and labeling it sexist or sexism without a full understanding of what it really is. I'm tired of "Feminists" putting more emphesis on why disney princesses are bad for society and saying nothing about women who are actually doing something in their respective places in life. I haven't seen one "feminist" blog even mention Marissa Mayer today. That's fucking dumb.

"Feminists" destroyed the term feminism and are doing more harm to the feminist movement then the right ever did.

Which feminists, where. Other than Dworkin I don't really see this in academic circles and yet it gets touted as unmitigated truth.

 

[Mumei]

Then they need a better PR person, because everyone I see actively, aggressively touting the label of feminist seems to be doing a pretty good job making the argument against being one. I don't care about the politics of it, I get tired of "feminists" raising the rally flag against things they don't know and labeling it sexist or sexism without a full understanding of what it really is. I'm tired of "Feminists" putting more emphesis on why disney princesses are bad for society and saying nothing about women who are actually doing something in their respective places in life. I haven't seen one "feminist" blog even mention Marissa Mayer today. That's fucking dumb.

"Feminists" destroyed the term feminism and are doing more harm to the feminist movement then the right ever did.

You don't actually read feminist blogs, do you?

 

[SmokyDave]

I think her point was that there are radicals in any social movement (or political party), but it was the demonization of feminism that has given people the impression that those radical feminists are representative of feminism as a whole.

Seems like a chicken and egg situation to me. No doubt there are elements that have demonised feminism but they'd have had no ammunition without radical feminism.

 

[BocoDragon]

If feminism is about equality, and acceptance of all types of people, then I'm for it.

If feminism is a kind of cosmology about "the patriarchy" and how all possible male and female differences are a fabrication of this shadowy sinister social organization ... Then it sounds like religion to me. This worldview is asserted without proof, has a whole made up assumptions about the construction of sex and gender and the state of society, and often steps on the toes of science and psychology.

 

[Vermillion]

You don't actually read feminist blogs, do you?

I don't think not talking about pregnancy will ever happen. Especially for someone in power.

Hell, even with male celebrities you hear when their wives have children or if they adopt.

 

[XANDER CAGE]

Then they need a better PR person, because everyone I see actively, aggressively touting the label of feminist seems to be doing a pretty good job making the argument against being one. I don't care about the politics of it, I get tired of "feminists" raising the rally flag against things they don't know and labeling it sexist or sexism without a full understanding of what it really is. I'm tired of "Feminists" putting more emphesis on why disney princesses are bad for society and saying nothing about women who are actually doing something in their respective places in life. I haven't seen one "feminist" blog even mention Marissa Mayer today. That's fucking dumb.

"Feminists" destroyed the term feminism and are doing more harm to the feminist movement then the right ever did.

Unless you consider random people on Tumblr as academics, I really don't see what you're getting at. Does anyone here not identify as an atheist because 16 year olds on the internet are jerks about being atheists?

 

[Esch]

men dont like it because they think it has simpy connotations

or because they hate stereotypical feminists

 

[IrishNinja]

No, I'd guess you could call me more of an egalitarian.

Everyone should be equal. *shrug*

i was gonna reply to these, but mumei's first post (and the one quoted therein) did a much better job, check those out.

men dont like it because they think it has simpy connotations

or because they hate stereotypical feminists

both of these conditions are true for many women too, though. 3rd wave in particular kinda suffers from stereotypes that aren't nearly relevant since over a generation ago.

 

[kinoki]

Do I consider myself a feminist? Not really.

But that really doesn't give the whole picture. Do I meet every single criteria to be considered a feminist? Yes. Would someone call me a feminist knowing my stance in certain issues? Most likely. Do I like labels? No, I hate every -ism there is and don't consider myself part of any of them.

 

[travisbickle]

Seems like a chicken and egg situation to me. No doubt there are elements that have demonised feminism but they'd have had no ammunition without radical feminism.

What's wrong with radical feminism? it views the patriarchal system as the main cause for the suppression of women. It's the most 'relatable' form of feminism to men who respond with "what about us? and our men issues?".

 

[Devolution]

What's wrong with radical feminism? it views the patriarchal system as the main cause for the suppression of women. It's the most 'relatable' form of feminism to men who respond with "what about us? and our men issues?".

They think rad fems are out to castrate them or something.

 

[Mumei]

travisbickle, he means the radical feminism that veers off the cliff of sanity towards Misandryville.

It's not mainstream or representative, and not even influential, but it isn't *completely* nonexistent.

Personally, I consider myself radical in the sense that you use the term.

Seems like a chicken and egg situation to me. No doubt there are elements that have demonised feminism but they'd have had no ammunition without radical feminism.

Sure.

But the point is that it is not possible to have a social movement that lacks radical elements. And yet, you don't see that sort of widespread demonization towards, say, people who support gay rights. Do you see people in the mainstream referring to prejudiced comments that gay rights advocates were saying decades ago about the inability to straights to ever accept gay people? Or making reference to the actually radical goals of early gay liberation (relative to the more incrementalist gay assimilationist movement)? I don't think having radical elements inevitably leads to widespread demonization on the basis of promoting those radical elements as representative.

You're right that without that sort of radical feminism, they wouldn't have had anything to work with, but I think that your position, whether you mean for it to or not, takes away a lot of responsibility from people who have intentionally lied about a social movement you consider yourself a part of.