Might help also to describe what you think feminism is, since it’s one of those terms that is overloaded.
I once had a physical therapist tell me she wasn’t a feminist because she thought women couldn’t be as physically capable as men when serving as soldiers, and seemed to believe feminism requires treating women exactly like men.
I told her I was a feminist because I believe in equal rights for men and women, an idea she did not seem so opposed to.
Of course I’m a feminist. It’s one of those sublime categories like “alive” or “pregnant” that has only two possible states.
- Feminist
- Sexist pig.
This is the basic problem with how feminism is promoted. If you don’t agree with our views, you are a sexist pig.
This is not a good way to make reluctant people to accept your ideas. It pushes them even further into opposition.
Can you please be a bit more concrete? What do you think feminism is and which views would push someone into opposition?
There are some who use the “feminism” banner to promoted sexism towards men. I’ve seen posts that talk about wishing for a world where no men exist etc and it gets praised under the guise of feminism.
Imo that isn’t feminism, that’s just misandry. If you swapped our the word “men” with “women” in those posts, they would rightly be called sexist.
I am definitely a feminist in that i believe in equality and believe that women have had a number of challenges presented to them that men typically dont experience.
I also, however, believe there are challenges that men experience that typically women dont.
Feminism is equal rights and opportunities for everyone. My added thing is equal responsibilities. This is the dictionary type of definition.
Most people (at least the vocal ones) are either completely sexist (both sides - feminazis and sexist men) or think it is only about promoting interests of women.
I can’t give you all the possible views off the top of my head but I’ll try.
- If you are not a feminist, you are sexist. - There is no nuance or leniency for human nature. This makes skeptics jump to opposition because they feel attacked for their behaviour. Any further push only makes them more apprehensive.
- Men have it so good - This is kind of a mixed bag for even me because it is situation and topic specific. Men have had better opportunities for some things like education or jobs, yes. But they have fared worse in some other things like emotions, expectations, dating, etc. Now, if someone who struggles with a lot of things is told “Men have it so much better”, they will not agree because any one person can only experience their own problems. On the other hand, there are men who feel women have it too easy with how they can earn money by selling porn, they can get out of situations by crying, how easy it is for women to get laid, etc. I don’t necessarily agree with everything but this is what I have seen people say. So, this makes “Men have it better” laughable for some people.
- Where are the equal responsibilities? - Feminism promotes equal rights but (conveniently) ignore the equal responsibilities part. A lot of women like to be damsels in distress and also want to enjoy the perks of freedom and equality. This is something I personally despise a lot.
If you are not a feminist, you don’t believe in the equality of the sexes, right?
I’m not sure, this feels a bit like when people complain about “anti-fascist” as a label because it makes them feel pressured to be anti-fascist or otherwise be seen as sympathetic to fascism … my question is why is anti-fascism (or in this case, feminism) so hard to accept?
I guess feminism works precisely by getting us to think about sexism and whether we think that is acceptable or not - I don’t think it’s good to be sexist, and I think it’s reasonable to feel ashamed about being sexist. Social shame and taboo seems appropriate in this case, no? Like the anti-fascist example, fascists should be ashamed and face taboo for their views.
Not that you’re wrong, some people will double-down in the face of opposition, this is precisely why so many fundamentalist churches promote street preaching, it doesn’t convert people (which is the reason given for the activity), but it is effective at solidifying the loyalty of the member, since on the street they experience significant opposition, which bolsters their in-group identity. It’s like a cult dynamic.
So yeah, it’s probably good for social shame to be introduced for sexism, fascism, racism, etc. - but it’s not a complete victory, the shame can induce stronger loyalties to those movements for those who still hold the views despite their taboo status.
People are unique and everyone has varying opinions on every topic, so how can they be simplified to a simple yes or no. There is a spectrum for everything. People who are at extremes find it easy to fit in yes or no categories but everyone else feels lost.
For example, there can be a guy in a rural area who supports his family’s women by letting them go to school/college, working, dating who they want but he is very adamant that they should not dress and wear makeup like “whores”. Would you call him a feminist? Why or why not?
it’s probably good for social shame to be introduced for sexism, fascism, racism, etc
Yikes, this is a hard no. People don’t change their views like this. Also, you are being a bully if you shame people for anything. Just because you think you have a moral high ground does not make it okay to impose it on others. You are no different than religious evangelicals if you do.
If a person can’t accept the basic premise that woman are equal to men, they’re sexist by definition. This isn’t the fault of “how feminism is promoted”.
It is. Most people associate feminism with promoting women and not equality. Most people don’t look up the definition in a dictionary
“most people” are (1) a much smaller group that you think and (2) wrong.
If your behavior can at all be described as sexist, then you’re not a feminist. That includes both Feminism Appropriating Radical Transphobes like JK Rowling.and outright sex pests like Andrew Cuomo.
Well, I can only comment on my social group and that is the only group i am concerned about in this context. So, it is ‘most people’ for me.
If your behavior can at all be described as sexist, then you’re not a feminist.
I hate this polar thinking so much. Everything is not all or none, yes or no, black or white. People are unique and everything is a spectrum. Even Hitler had admirable qualities and if this makes you uneasy, you need to open up your mind.
Even Hitler had admirable qualities
But certainly the most relevant quality he had was his rabid, genocidal antisemitism, right?
You wouldn’t complain about him being labeled as a eugenicist just because he painted a little when he wasn’t slaughtering millions.
I don’t mix things. I admire Hitler for being a vegan and pursuing art. I absolutely hate what he did with concentration camps.
But certainly the most relevant quality he had was his rabid, genocidal antisemitism, right?
Relavant depends on the thing we talk about. If we are talking about history, he isn’t winning any Peace or Humanitarian awards.
I care a lot less about what word they use than what ideals they espouse. They can call themselves egalitarians or antisexists or whatever label as long as they oppose sexism, misogyny, heteronormativity, and “gender roles”.
Agreed. I think as a whole society has started giving more value to words than actions. It is backwards, especially when social media is prone to creating echo chambers for words, and actions go unnoticed.
My politics are death to america and death to israel. Free Palestine and free the planet from US empire and centuries of European colonial domination.
Feminists have not done much materially on that front lets be honest.
Throwback to big name feminist Judith Butler on October 13 2023:
spoiler
In fact, I do condemn without qualification the violence committed by Hamas. This was a terrifying and revolting massacre. That was my primary reaction, and it endures.
…
There are those who do use the history of Israeli violence in the region to exonerate Hamas, but they use a corrupt form of moral reasoning to accomplish that goal. Let’s be clear, Israeli violence against Palestinians is overwhelming: relentless bombing, the killing of people of every age in their homes and on the streets, torture in their prisons, techniques of starvation in Gaza and the dispossession of homes. And this violence, in its many forms, is waged against a people who are subject to apartheid rules, colonial rule and statelessness. When, however, the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee issues a statement claiming that ‘the apartheid regime is the only one to blame’ for the deadly attacks by Hamas on Israeli targets, it makes an error. It is wrong to apportion responsibility in that way, and nothing should exonerate Hamas from responsibility for the hideous killings they have perpetrated.
Judith was not the only big name feminist to hold such views following the magnificent al Aqsa Flood Operation.
I would say that the web of NED/USAID NGO’s that represent the face of feminism today has been a very effective tool of empire. I dont want women CEOs and women drone pilots and women iof soldiers and women politicians in puppet governments. I am a woman who wants the end of colonial occupation and superexploitation.
You have a very developed viewpoint! Thank you for sharing it!
🫡
If feminism means equality, yes. If it means women are better than men, no. If it means women have been oppressed so now it is their turn, no.
What is it means men get systematically treated better so we need to put our finger on the scale?
I don’t understand your statement
FYI you can’t be a feminist if you pay for the SA and murder of other women.
What is this referring to?
How dairy cows need to be pregnant in order to produce milk, so they’re artificially inseminated and kept pregnant throughout most of their lives?
Yes. They can’t consent and they are used like objects, only seen as a means of making milk and more cows.
women aren’t cows. cows aren’t women. and artificial insemination isn’t SA, it’s a veterinary procedure.
Well cows wouldn’t call themselves “women” no, but I’m sure they do have some gender expression that is apart from just their sex. I could have said females, but I don’t really like using that word.
These cows cannot consent to having someone shove a fist inside them, it is very much SA. I’m sure colonizers had the same mentality as you when they were SA Women of colour and indigenous women.
comparing indigenous people to animals is gross
Thinking just because someone has a different shaped body than you and isn’t as intelligent gives someone the right to SA them is gross.
The problem is you being so brainwashed to think it’s okay to abuse others that you forget indigenous people are animals. We all are.
indigenous people are animals.
kindly, leave me alone
That you think other animals are below you is the problem here. Don’t blame me for your human supremacy.
I haven’t made any such statements. please leave me alone
doors can’t consent to have your keys jammed in them either. the very concept of consent can’t be applied to cows or doors.
Cows are sentient, you comparing them to objects is exactly the kind of shit feminism fights against.
If a human had the same intelligence as a cow do you think it would be okay to SA them?
If a human had the same intelligence as a cow
I haven’t said anything about intelligence, or suggested sa is ever ok.
sentience has nothing to do with consent.
Sentience has to do with among many other things, the ability to suffer. These cows suffer because they are SA, have their kids stolen from them and have their lives cut short only to end in some place worse than hell.
So no sentience does have something to do with consent because only with sentience does consent matter. I don’t need to ask a tree consent to cut it down because it does not feel anything. I do need to ask other individuals for consent because they can suffer.
consent and sentience are totally unrelated concepts. your response only continues to muddy the waters.
I believe that I am, but I’m told that my definition is wrong.
For reference, my definition is:
Anybody who believes in equal rights for women.
that’s about what my definition is too, what do you think other people think feminism means, why are you told your definition is wrong?
Yeah, specifically I’m fairly third wave in that I’ve been convinced of the value of an intersectional perspective, am pro modern sexual liberation (including the freedom to not want it), and generally am more aligned with the feminist critiques of the second wave. Furthermore I find a lot of the fourth wave to a shitshow, though considering the concept of the fourth wave is not based on academic ideas or coherent demands, but rather the idea that social media changed feminist discourse so radically as to constitute a change to a different wave.
Feminism has always had multiple sides, and like most liberatory movements it has people who are cringe, who are counterproductively hostile, and who generally suck. It will try things that don’t work or push things in bad directions. Also college students and young people will do it in ways that look terrible. But feminist theory is also insightful texts that challenge cultural biases. And in a time where rights such as abortion are under attack and government officials are expressing their opposition to women’s suffrage, the principle of equality and fundamental rights remains even if it looks different now from when our grandmothers and great grandmothers were fighting for the right for a bank account.
This is insane. Why is everyone redefining the feminist movement!? Why so many “this feminism but”? Feminism is the belief in and advocacy of political, economic, and social equality of the sexes.
Do you believe sexes should have equal rights in society? Yes? You’re a feminist. Don’t be afraid of the term. That means that you bought up the anti-feminist propaganda. It’s like going about saying “I’m against the genocide, but not the kind where I hate the jews or support Hamas or terrorist but I believe in not killing children but of course not the kind of belief where I’d attack israeli sold…” Like wtf is this. That’s the definition. Stop tiptoeing. Call it out when you see it. Help your fellow human beings and keep on with your life.
There should be a different word that doesn’t favor one side if it’s about equality.
Anyone who is tired of people misconstruing the meaning of the word ‘feminism’ should be trying to find a better word that means what they are trying to convey.
I don’t believe in an -ism. I believe in equal rights. I think the name feminism does more harm than good.
Why does the name do harm? If it was “anti-sexism” instead would it be more appealing, or are all “-ism” labels bad in your mind? (Might I ask why the -ism is problematic? Would you have the same view of anti-racism, for example?)
Labels that start off as descriptive become prescriptive. People who associate strongly with a label are less likely to have nuance to their views or change their minds. It becomes us and them.
You can become a prisoner of your labels.
isn’t feminism prescriptive / normative to begin with? It’s not a neutral description of injustice, it’s a call to action, a movement … no?
I hear you on the strong connection to a label, the way us-them dynamics can be dangerous - but the extreme opposite doesn’t seem to work either, so I don’t see this as a full justification of rejecting labels. If you are invested in a movement towards equal rights, sometimes having a banner to organize under and communicate by is useful … it might be helpful to think of a time before the feminist movement existed, and the motivations that exist for the movement.
The fact that there are so many definitions of what feminism is, shows that the label is not super useful. If you say you’re a feminist, you then have to explain which version you’re taking about.
It could be anything from “people should be given equal opportunity” to the extreme “all sex between a man and a women is rape”
I’m not OP, but many people associate feminism with strengthening women specifically. If you look up the definition it actually does focus gender equality, no matter what gender you have. So from my perspective the term isn’t really intuitive.
Another thing I don’t like about the definition (at least the one on Wikipedia) is…
Feminism holds the position that modern societies are patriarchal—they prioritize the male point of view—and that women are treated unjustly in these societies.
While I sure get what they mean, I personally don’t like to classify one’s point of view as ‘male’. I agree that there are far more toxic men that seek more and more power. But i don’t dislike such people because they are men. I’d dislike their behavior just as much if they were women, non-binaries or any other gender. Classifying a character trait male IMHO is similar to calling a skirt or dress ‘women clothes’.
So yes, to me personally, anti-sexism / anti-discrimination or even better pro-equality are more appealing.
Do you think women face more inequality than men? What gender inequality is there to address, i.e. why does feminism as a movement of gender equality exist?
Yes, I think women face more inquality than men. And queer people face even more discrimination than women. But also cis-men that don’t fit well into the traditional gender roles, can face discrimation. I do not object the ideology behind femism. I just don’t like the term.
I think women do experience more gender based adversities, but I worry framing it like that creates an “us and them” situation between genders. We should fight inequality wherever it exists.
It also misses intersectionality. Not all men are advantaged over all women. A man born in poverty, violence, with a disability, or of a marginalised race, isn’t automatically better off than a rich white women born to a good supportive family.
Women face different inequality than men. Where women are treated as valuable property, men are treated as disposable tools or dangerous threats. Feminism has done much to elevate women above valuable property, but men are still treated as disposable or dangerous.
Egalitarianism is a better term.
That just erases that, currently, women are far more oppressed than men. Men are negatively impacted by patriarchal society as well, we all stand to gain from its abolition, but erasing that it is women that are most subjugated makes room for opportunists to coopt the movement and shut down women.
This is the kind of thinking that pushes men away from feminism. When there is a clear intention to favor one sex over the other, the other will obviously be much less inclined to help.
There is no intention to “favor one sex over the other.” The present system is explicitly cismale-supremacist. Any attempt to erase that weakens the movement and serves to perpetuate sexism against women and non-binary folk. This is similar to the “All Lives Matter” movement as a way to disrupt the “Black Lives Matter” movement.
It might not be the intention but modern day feminism has become so much about what women can and cannot do and how men are pigs.
No, it hasn’t. This is the way conservatives frame the feminist movement, but the actual reality of feminism is far more grounded. When you cede the narrative and legitimize the conservative viewpoint, you weaken the movement.
“isms” are useful, and the name feminism is perfectly fine.
No it’s not. It clearly favors one side, but then people are saying it’s about equality.
If whatever feminism is trying to describe is truly about equality, then we should use a term that isn’t biased.
This is the same as saying the “All Lives Matter” crowd were correct in fighting Black Lives Matter. Women are more oppressed than men, even if everyone is oppressed by the patriarchy.
Not really.
Black Lives Matter is a movement specifically to shed light on how cops abuse their power towards people of color and frequently go unpunished for it. Black Lives Matter is not about addressing how white people may suffer at the hands of police brutality and if you’re trying to argue that it is, then you’re either disingenuous or ignorant.
You do have a point though, where both feminism and Black Lives Matter focus on one group over people over others.
Feminism as a movement specifically sheds light on the systemic violence against women and gender-diverse individuals under patriarchy. That doesn’t mean men don’t also benefit, but it does shed light on the primary issue.
(This comment uses translation software.)
Yes. I am a feminist, though I am skeptical.
Some feminists argue(Article in Japanese) that the gender equality brought about by feminism also liberates men from the suffering unique to them.
I take a similar stance, believing that the ‘gender equality’ brought about by male feminism, which seeks happiness for men, also liberates women from the suffering unique to them. In some ways, I am a reactionary feminist.
Previously, I was a male feminist with old-fashioned thinking, striving to eliminate only women’s suffering, not men’s.
However, I changed my mind after the Japanese government, where I live, adopted a policy of allocating “female admission quotas” at prestigious universities, including national universities, as part of its affirmative action program, modeled on America’s racial admission quotas.
Even back when I supported traditional feminism, I was critical of the current state of university education in Japan, where there are public women’s universities but no public men’s universities. I also believe that expanding these quotas to general universities would violate the Constitution, which proclaims gender equality. I cannot trust traditional Japanese feminism, which supports the unconstitutional status quo, and that is why I have become the skeptical feminist I mentioned earlier.
Feminist as fuck!
Feminism is the fight for equality, with a particular focus on the needs of women and folk perceived as women. Men are included in feminism, but indirectly, in that improving equality for women necessarily requires addressing systems, norms and issues that negatively impact men as well.
Sure, it’s easy to say that you’re “egalitarian” or believe in “equality for all”, but those sound bites, whilst heading off the anti feminist folk, completely fail to address the fact that inequality is not equally spread between men and women. When everything else is equal, women still deal with more inequality than men, and feminism is exists because of that fact
When everything else is equal, women still deal with more inequality than men, and feminism is exists because of that fact
this is such a succinct and eloquent point about why “feminism” is focused on women at all … this point seems lost on so many men, who seem to think “equality” demands we ignore the way inequality and power is distributed, as if the only approach to the situation is a kind of gender-blindness, and anything else is hypocrisy
Can you explain how women deal with more inequality than men?
Until 1972, birth control pills were not accessible to unmarried women.
Until 1973, women in most states could not serve on juries in the U.S.
Until 1974, women were unable to obtain a credit card or open a bank account without their husband as co-signer (and unmarried women were entirely unable to have a bank account or credit card).
Until the 1970s, women were not permitted at most Ivy Leagues (e.g. Harvard did not allow women until 1977).
Until 1978, women could be fired for becoming pregnant.
Until 1980, sexual harassment was not considered a form of sex discrimination, and the first legal case where a court agreed a woman was sexually harassed in the workplace was in 1977.
Until 1993, husbands could legally rape their wives in the many states of the U.S.
Until 2010 health insurance companies were permitted to discriminate against women and charge them higher prices than men for the same coverage.
Until 2013, women were not permitted to serve in combat roles in the U.S. military.
One in three women have experienced physical or sexual violence from an intimate partner (compared to 1 in 14 for men).
Women still earn 82 cents to the dollar compared to men, and in 1982 that was 65 cents to the dollar (the situation has not improved since the 90s).
Women experience greater job gaps and unemployment than men.
Only 10% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women.
In 2022, only 33% of university presidents were women.
Women currently make up less than 30% of the U.S. House of Representatives, and 25% of the Senate.
For more: https://www.un.org/en/un75/women_girls_closing_gender_gap
For each of those examples women were disadvantaged and men were advantaged. So they both experienced inequality.
I am a staunch second-wave feminist. I believe in equal rights and equal respect for men and women and everyone else who doesn’t fit into that binary, and that all should be able to work toward the life that suits them best without worrying about traditional gender roles.
It makes me sad to see women who are quick to say they’re not a feminist, because they certainly benefit from feminism and I think they’d be rightly enraged if that went away. If they lost the right to vote, to have a bank account or own a home, to pursue whatever education interests them and work in that field, to choose whether/when/how to have children (RIP Roe v Wade), etc. I think a lot of women take a lot of these things for granted, but they exist because of feminism.
Sadly, I think the term ‘feminism’ has been successfully demonized in online spaces, to the point that many think it’s the same as feminazi. In part this is because the most awful and vocal part of any movement draws a lot of negative attention, and subsequently those who are against equality for women can use feminazis as a boogeyman to denigrate the feminist movement.
"feminazi’ is kinda like calling a woman a “female”. Its use conveys a “I’m a sexist pig” message you do not seem to intend.
Better terms for women who believe that (cisgender) women are superior to men.
- Feminine Supremacist
- Feminine Chauvinist
- Sexist Woman
- Man-hater
- Anti-feminist
- F.A.R.T.
- Sexist woman
- Sexist pig
Some of these may covey other messages in their usage.
I am neither a Feminist, nor a Machista. However I feel like both genders have equal ability to do anything (except biological things, but that’s what science is for). One thing that gets on my nerves is the idea that society says that whomever stays at home is weak… Motherfucker, taking care or tiny humans, dumb animals and somehow keep a whole house clean and disinfected is as much work as any blue collar job (fuck, it might be even harder). On top of that my wife cooks amazing so whenever I can I treat her with whatever she wants whenever she wants it because she fucking earned it, because that’s why I’m the one working, and I know she would do the same if the roles where reversed.
I am not a feminist.
Feminism has a variety of different flavors with sets of specific ideals that are not a priority in my view, however the basic idea of equal rights is definitely important to me. The more I think about it, the less I feel I know what I’m talking about which is also why I don’t wanna signify I have strong foundational knowledge on this topic. “Equality” is kind of baseline and not what you expect most kinds of feminism to expand to.
Hm, equality is precisely what I think feminism is about, some of the most famous feminist works like bell hooks’ Feminism is For Everybody is entirely about how feminism is an egalitarian movement.
What do you expect feminism to expand to, and why do you think that? It’s interesting you feel like you might not know much about feminism - have you read or studied any feminist authors or books (like Simone de Beauvoir’s Second Sex)? What has informed your view of what feminism is?
I believe that men, women and all other genders that people are constructing these days - whether real or fabricated, zero fucks - should be treated equally in the eyes of the law, they should have equal pay, should be given the same opportunities and should be treated with equal respect. If that makes me a feminist, then cool.
I also believe that the reason the term gets a bad rap sometimes is because of the general stage humanity finds itself in. Consider this, for hundreds and hundreds of years men had the upper hand and only very recently did we start this process of equalizing women.
I imagine society like a car going down the road, when you lose control in a turn, the knee-jerk reaction is to steer the other direction and for a brief moment there you’re going way over to the other side before eventually correcting/ normalizing your course. Imho this is what happens with every new concept that gets introduced, there’s an overreach before normality ensues.
It’s even more pronounced with LGBTQ people. They were hidden, non existent in the eyes of society, and now we’re at the parade stage. My prediction is that soon there will be no need for it.
Nah.
For one, I don’t like a term that’s supposed to promote equality clearly favoring one side in its name.
For two, most feminists I’ve met genuinely hate men and think they’re owed superiority, not equality, for the treatment of women in the past.
How do you feel about Black Lives Matter as a name and slogan?
Do you think there might be a reason feminism is named that way?
Black Lives Matter is a fine name for what it supports.
I didn’t study the etymology of feminism, but in practice it has always resulted in fighting for women’s rights while ignoring or paying lip-service to men’s rights.
There’s no feminist platform that advocates for removing men from the draft or including women in it, for example. I don’t believe that the differences between men and women, especially today, are great enough to give any preference to one sex over the other. Most of us are suffering because we are poor.
From my experience, feminists will say feminism is about equality to fool people who don’t know any better into supporting a cause that is practically about female superiority. They believe it’s woman’s turn to be the oppressors and to them that is ‘fair.’
This is exemplified by how it’s socially acceptable (even encouraged) to make disparaging comments about men, but making similar comments about women will get you ostracized. You can’t say you’re for equality of the sexes if you laugh when somebody says “I hate all men” but get angry if someone else says “I hate all women.” Neither is acceptable, but feminists will disagree.
