What's Your Opinion On Feminism?

[NoOne]

So I remember writing about Christian feminists and why they confuse me a while back, but now I would like to talk about actual feminism. I would like to hear everyone's opinions on it, if this topic appeals to you of course.

Here's what I think...I call myself a kind of feminist. The concept is amazing, the people who follow the concept suck. And the way they represent the concept speaks louder than concept's definition itself. I don't mind being associated with feminism, but I'm not sure if I want to be associated with the radicals, the whiny ones, the women who don't actually know what they're talking about, etc. I do believe men can be feminists, there's a big debate on whether they can or can't. Intersectional feminism fights against sexism, as well as racism, homophobia, transphobia, ableism, classism, and legalism, so I'm really interested in that kind. I do think we have it so much better here in America compared to the women in the East, but there's still a lot we could do. We definitely need to help Eastern women asap and amap, and stop thinking they can just fix it themselves. I do think modern feminists in the west pick at straws, making a big deal out of the smallest things, and I think that's why some people don't take feminism seriously. Also, some of the ways they go about their ads, like Ban Bossy or the Potty Mouth Princesses. The message is, again, amazing. But the way they present it sucks or is just stupid. And lastly, I do think privilege exists but it only goes so far, meaning it balances out because you're always going to be more privileged than some but than also less privileged than others.

Alright, enough of me. What do you think about feminism and why? Happy Thursday ❤️

[yunea]

Well I think feminists have done a lot of things that absolutely needed to be done in the past, such as getting women rights to vote, study, own property and get a divorce, for example.

 

But today, even though some things are still definitely wrong and need to be worked on, it's very hard to understand some of the things the radical ones say and do. My personally biggest issue is with academic feminism and the "research" they do that supposedly "challenges" natural sciences, and the way they explain EVERYthing with gender and see oppression in unbelievable places (I've studied it just to find out what exactly they do, and was appalled). It's like a sick cult, or like a strange religion where everyone cherry-picks stuff that suits their own ideas and calls it truth (hmmmmm, reminds me of something, can't think of exactly what....hmmmm...   ).

 

I love Christina Hoff Sommers though and if I were to call myself a feminist, I'd love to be associated with her. Of course I am for advocating human rights, but I agree with her in that today's radical feminists' version of the thing is harmful to both men and women, taking focus away from problems that are very real and people that truly suffer from them. (And yes I'll be happy to elaborate if needed.)

[mymistake]

I love equality.  Some people say Feminism is simply equality.  Unfortunately other people act as if Feminism means something entirely different.  The name has so much baggage that we should probably look for a new name.  Those who seek gender equality can use HeForShe or even humanism.  Isn't that what we really want?  Equality for all humans?  I don't see how anybody could be a humanist without wanting gender equality.  Under humanism gender equality is a standard human right that should be taken for granted once it is achieved.

 

We have some work to do in the West where a few problems remain.  And we have a lot of work to do in Africa and the Middle East where some people live under barbaric conditions.

[Castiel233]

Not a big fan of "isms" generally. I believe in sensible equality (both genders should be paid the same for doing the same job).

 

That said not all people can do all jobs equally. I once worked at a company  which  involved very heavy lifting. Bar one exception, the women were not allowed to work on "The Belt" as they simply were not strong enough, I mentioned to to a feminist I knew, she said those women had every right to work on "the belt" and they should do....yet none of them seemed to mind this exclusion.

[Bhim]

Heh, you sure you guys want to do this?

 

I've never thought about feminism much. However I've formulated a definitive view this past year.  Those who peruse the blogosphere will know that 2014 was the year that feminists put the spotlight on what they believe to be an epidemic of campus rape.  Obviously no one supports rape, so this seemed reasonable to me.  And then someone wrote this:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/12/06/no-matter-what-jackie-said-we-should-automatically-believe-rape-claims/

 

The tl;dr is as follows: for the particular crime of rape we should suspend the American ethic of "innocent until proven guilty." To be fair the author (who is a trained lawyer) makes it clear that she is not making a legal argument about how the courts should operate, but rather she is addressing how she believes society should operate outside the courts.  This is almost worse, because she suggests that society judge people without so much as a trial.  I have always believed in Blackstone's formulation that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer.  This opinion piece, and many others like it, turn that maxim on its head.  Christian politicians have done much to ruin America, and I have not once considered moving to another country. However if this philosophy ever became law, I would. I cannot live in a country where the judicial system is not heavily biased in favor of the accused, regardless of the seriousness of the crime with which he is accused. And it is feminism which is opposing precisely this view.

 

Now, there are feminist authors who eschew the ethic which is espoused in the opinion piece I linked to. However, much like Islamic fundamentalism I do not hear this opposition loudly enough.  Whatever views I may share with feminists, this single issue is enough to make me fight anything that carries the feminist label.  Let me be clear, I do believe in gender equality.  But I believe far more strongly in not sending people to jail for offenses they didn't commit.  If I have to support one cause at the expense of the other, due process wins hands down, and that is why I cannot support or even tolerate any feminist movement until this culture of mob rule is eradicated from American society.

 

Now, I'm sure many here will want to yell at me.  Feel free, but I do ask that at some point in your post you please clearly state your view on due process, both inside and outside the court system.

[SilentLoner]

Anyone who agrees that men and women should have the same economic, social and political rights is a feminist. 

[SilentLoner]

I love equality.  Some people say Feminism is simply equality.  Unfortunately other people act as if Feminism means something entirely different.  The name has so much baggage that we should probably look for a new name.  Those who seek gender equality can use HeForShe or even humanism.  Isn't that what we really want?  Equality for all humans?  I don't see how anybody could be a humanist without wanting gender equality.  Under humanism gender equality is a standard human right that should be taken for granted once it is achieved.

 

 

Read this:

This Is Why Feminism Isn't Called 'Humanism'

 

No, a new name is not needed. The reason why is that the people who crusade against feminism now will do the same to the new label, because for most if not all of those people, raging at feminism is a safe cover for their sentiments against women in general.

 

Also, this article just came out today and I found it quite relevant:

Feminism is gendered not because women want to be treated better in the future but because they're being treated worse right now. Insisting on "equalism" means defining yourself by ignoring that fact. As if sexism, street harassment, pay differences, and rape threats affect genders equally. But the only way everyone could be affected equally is if we were conquered by the universe's worst aliens. And should we enter that dark space-future, and you get the job as commander of Babylon 5 with its dozens of alien races, then sure, equalism will be the way to go. But here on Earth we have a gender spectrum with two definite poles, and one of them is clearly treated worse than the other.

 

It's amazing how many people are prepared to publicly be on the wrong side of progress. We have never looked back on any part of history and said, "Actually, we were totally right to diminish and ignore the complaints of that mistreated demographic group. That wasn't a humiliating monstrosity at all!"

 

Feminism is the idea that women should have equal rights. Anyone claiming otherwise is explaining what's wrong with themselves instead.

 

http://www.cracked.com/blog/8-a242423oles-who-show-up-every-time-word-feminism-used_p2/

 

[mymistake]

 

 

No, a new name is not needed. The reason why is that the people who crusade against feminism now will do the same to the new label, because for most if not all of those people, raging at feminism is a safe cover for their sentiments against women in general.

 

 

 

Uh . . . no, no, no and no.  If Feminism was just a synonym for equality then we wouldn't even use the word Feminism.

 

 

The illogical, nonsensical and divisive ideology is really holding equality back.

[Thurisaz]

Ah feminism.

 

As officially defined, it blows my mind why anyone would not support it. Why the ever-loving fuck would any sane human being want to make half of the population into Untermenschen™?

 

As it is in the cultural mainstream though...

 

Now, caveat: I live in Germany so I mainly refer to current German culture. That said, if you listen to the talking heads here... you know, the self-proclaimed ruling caste of politicians, rich assholes and mass media... this cultural mainstream has long crossed the equality line and mindlessly pukes out a never-ending stream of misandry these days. The woman who (they think) is German feminism, one Alice Schwarzer, has just a few years ago demanded that we deny the protection of the rule of law to any man who is accused of having done Something™ by any woman and must consider him guilty until proven innocent... even punish him anyway even if he just got acquitted. Another self-proclaimed "feminist" on this very forum has specifically told me, some time ago, that men aren't even entitled to basic human rights when dealing with women.

 

And there some people still wonder why I'm not instantly overjoyed when I hear this particular F-word...

 

So, inasmuch as feminism means gender equality, absofuckinglutely yes. But the way it's represented by the mainstream today, it's a hate cult just like morontheist jebus or moohamit cults. Not a single tiny bit better. Good thing is, most common people think this hype is bullcrap and are pretty much on the right track (yes the equality track) as I found out recently.

 

Someone on this site has linked to a nice blog lately, by a trans woman who also criticizes this particular hate brand of feminism. You folks may want to check it out if you haven't already... I don't agree to 100 % of what she says (reads to me like she thinks there's no misogyny at all in the world, and umm no, as nice as that would be, it's bullshit) but most is damn good stuff.

 

Linky

[ToHellWithMe]

I am not certain of what to think of feminism.

While people labelling themselves feminists educate me every now and then with some valid thoughts, their dismissal of different points of view and hostility toward criticism is worrisome at the very least.

[Thurisaz]

"Feminists" is a damn large group. Every sufficiently large group (I guess the limit is around 15 to 20 people...) will have assholes in its ranks. In the case of feminists the assholes are the misandric enslave-them-all bitchocrats (or 3rd wavers as the above-linked blog calls them... I don't think that designation is all too valid, to be polite, but I'm quoting it because bitchocrats may not be the best term for English-speakers either - now we at least have an alternative ).

And the world, and especially the liars' guilds (media), being as they are, you can bet that if in a group of 100 people you have one or two assholes, these are the only ones you'll ever hear about, to the point that you'll think the entire group is like them. The real problem comes when the decision-makers (politics...) start to believe this shit too, which is happening over here.

Honestly, I thought I'm living in a country where this misandric shit is the common, universal point of view on the "gender thing", until I finally dared to talk to some folks about it and found that... whee... they pretty much all think this is a mountain of bullshit. Only sad thing is that pretty much no one dares to speak out against it in public.

 

Quite understandable though, as the mainstream will totally destroy anyone who dares as a Sexist Asshole™... no matter what his/her arguments are. Who would want that happen to him/herself if it can be avoided?

[mymistake]

Thurisaz, can we be a bit more constructive please?  I understand you are frustrated but come on.

[Thurisaz]

Well I have already stated my position on feminism above (I think)... if you'd like to hear more from me please ask. Until then, sorry if I came across as offensive or such. Wasn't my intention.

[Penguin]

Hrm. Defining "feminism" is a bit like playing whack-a-mole. The word means so many different things to so many people. So let me approach it from the dictionary definition I found:

 

 

 

the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

 

I agree with that idea. Women should have all the opportunities afforded to men in political, social, and economic arenas. In other words, a woman should be able to have the same jobs, be paid the same, and have the same rights as men. That is, of course, assuming she's qualified for the job. A man shouldn't have a job he's not qualified for; the same goes for a woman. A person should also not be paid beyond their qualifications.

 

The problem with feminism in practice is the same problem I see with race relations in some places. I used to live in a place that was 98% Black, with Whites comprising the smallest portion of the remaining 2%. In other words, there were more Hispanics, Asians, and so on than there were Whites. This was during the first presidential election in which Barack Obama was running. Most of the Blacks I talked to in the community I lived said that "Black people have a responsibility to vote for Barack Obama because he's Black."

 

Hold up. What happened to "...judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character?"

 

I'm not a racist or a misogynist, mind you. I would happily vote for a person outside my race if I felt they were qualified for the job. I'm a Libertarian, so no, I didn't vote for Barack.

 

At any rate, the same thing happens with feminism. Take two candidates. One is male, one is female. The man is more experienced, more qualified, and of a higher quality of character than the woman. Many a feminist would vote for the woman anyway. Why? Because she has a vagina? The shape and function of my sexual organs should not dictate my success in life. I think even a feminist would agree with that. What feminism often becomes is veiled misandry (and that veil is sometimes very, very thin).

 

In short, feminism is a great concept, but when it's carried out, it becomes something else entirely. Most of the "-isms" do, in fact. People have their prejudices, and we often use our "-isms" to justify them. From what I've seen, feminism is largely used to justify prejudice against men. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule, and I have met true feminists who don't practice misandry. It's a relief to meet a woman who only wants to be equal to men, not superior. Most of the feminism I see lords women as superior, to the point they'd take issue with the fact I use "lords" in this sentence.

 

Some feminists are cool.

 

Some feminists are batshit crazy.

[MyOwn]

I haven't read the other comments here (trying to squeeze in a few moments before kids wake up), but I had a few thoughts... Coming out of my Christian experience, I'm finding myself becoming more of a feminist (or, what I call a feminist). I don't know a lot about the feminist movement, except, like you, I don't like the way some people go about feminism. I personally, am focusing on trying to reclaim what womanhood is about. Focusing less on caring about society's definition of beauty and man's/society's expectation of that affecting my worth. (Something I struggled with tremendously when I was younger.) I have also seen first hand discrimination at my old workplace, due to being a woman, and I try to speak out about the double standard that can exist. Something else I have been thinking over a lot (and this has everything to do with my Christian experience), is the patriarchal society we are living in. I am really put off by it, and I'm wanting to learn more about what a matriarchal society would look like and how I could help promote it. I have heard that it is not about putting women over men, which I don't agree with either, but about exsisting in a truly equal way. I think it's important to honor what is unique about being a woman and what is unique about being a man.  I think as women though, we should go about feminism in keeping with our femininity. I feel like, sometimes the way it is gone about is very masculine. You know, all about trying to compete with masculinity, and take that over. I don't think that's the answer. I think there is a lot of unique strength in being a woman, and embracing that and rising up in that, with respect as equals, is a really good thing.

 

Sorry if this is kind of all over the place..

[NoOne]

Wow, you're all amazing! I like the varying opinions and the discussion going on here, it's really nice

So let me pose this question...do you believe in privilege and reverse discrimination (ex., reverse racism, misandry, heterophobia, etc.) I'll post my opinion after hearing some of yours.

 

I was up-voting a lot of your opinions and I reached the limit so if I didn't up-vote you, don't take it personally, I will soon.

[mymistake]

Wow, you're all amazing! I like the varying opinions and the discussion going on here, it's really nice

So let me pose this question...do you believe in privilege and reverse discrimination (ex., reverse racism, misandry, heterophobia, etc.) I'll post my opinion after hearing some of yours.

 

I was up-voting a lot of your opinions and I reached the limit so if I didn't up-vote you, don't take it personally, I will soon.

 

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "believe in".  If you mean do I believe they exist then sure.  I could cite real world examples.  If you mean support or sympathize then no.

[NoOne]

Yeah I meant do you think they exist.

[yunea]

Yeah I meant do you think they exist.

Most definitely, and they're real problems.

[NoOne]

Sorry, I just really love this discussion. I'm going to be impatient and say what I think right now...I know I suck

I think white people can experience racism but it will never be in the way Jews, blacks, Native Americans, Latinos, or Asians have or still do (big emphasis on Native Americans). Same with men, I think they can experience sexism but never in the same way or extent as women. Feminists and sociologists agree that it's possible to flip a system of oppression, therefore they don't think reverse discrimation exists. I have to look more into this. There are also some people who say that while people or men can experience discrimation but not racism or sexism. Anyone can experience discrimation but it's different than racism or sexism...once again, I need to do my research. I don't think heterophobia exists because straight people outnumber the LGBT community greatly so the minority can't raise up against the majority and oppress them, that's impossible.

Again, I do acknowledge that there's certain privileges...but only to an extent. What I mean is take a white girl in a wheelchair and me. She's white, I'm not. So she has "white privilege". But then again, I'm not disabled and she is. So I have that "able-bodied privilege" over her. We're both girls, so we're equal in that aspect. Also you have to consider other things, like what class we're in, if we have mental disorders, our sexuality, level of education, etc. it all balances out because no one is completely privileged in everything.

 

Also somebody said something about feminists being immature when it comes to differing opinions or criticism...I agree with that 110%

 

Whew...okay I'm done.

[Bhim]

Wow, you're all amazing! I like the varying opinions and the discussion going on here, it's really nice

So let me pose this question...do you believe in privilege and reverse discrimination (ex., reverse racism, misandry, heterophobia, etc.) I'll post my opinion after hearing some of yours.

 

I was up-voting a lot of your opinions and I reached the limit so if I didn't up-vote you, don't take it personally, I will soon.

 

Glad to hear you're open to differing points of view on this.  I'd be happy to share my opinion on these two other issues as well.

 

On privilege, I certainly agree that people are treated differently based on their outward appearance or status.  There is such a thing as Christian privilege, white privilege, etc.  That said, I take great issue when people attempt to correct for this via legislation or social policy.  For example, in India the government attempts to compensate for caste-based biases by reserving a certain quota of university admission and government jobs for low castes.  People who have the misfortune of being born in high castes will be denied certain opportunities, which will go to less qualified low-caste individuals.  Likewise here in the United States, affirmative action creates the same unjust system, though to a lesser extent than the Indian reservations system.  "Privilege" is a social bias in favor of one group over another.  It is asymmetric to correct for it by giving undeserved opportunities to the disfavored group.  Besides this, our view of privilege seems to be very narrow.  Society has a bias towards tall and attractive people, but short and ugly people aren't given compensation on account of their status.  We could exhaust ourselves trying to correct for the fact that humans are not born on an equal playing field.  Better, I think, to simply require that everyone be judged on their merits and to be done with it.

 

As for reverse discrimination, I don't see this as any more or less justifiable than standard discrimination.  A black person might hate a white person due to the history between these two races.  However when someone hates another due to differences in skin color, it is racism by definition.  I believe that "reverse" discrimination exists, but I don't think it ought to be treated differently than standard forms of discrimination.

 

Regarding misandry in particular, I know almost no women who are true misandrists.  Virtually every woman alive has male family and friends, and it's very hard for someone to truly hate an entire gender, when that gender comprises have the population.  There are some prominent misandrist bloggers, columnists, and various other feminist thinkers.  Really I'm willing to tolerate these peoples' existence, provided they never are in a position of power.  I am strongly opposed to any feminist being in a position of authority (e.g. politician, CEO of a company I happen to be working for, etc.), unless said feminist explicitly assents to the proposition that any man accused of a crime against a woman should be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt.  But aside from this, it doesn't bother me if certain women hate all men, provided that these people stay off my property and don't interact with me.

[Thurisaz]

While we are at the topic... as I see it, we mustn't ignore the question here of "how things really are" vs "how they tell us things are".

 

Over here: What they tell us ("they" being the media and such) is that women are sooooo totally the victims, all women, all the time, and men are evil oppressors and sexist monsters, all men, all the time. How things really are, as pretty much everyone says since I started talking to people about it, is that yes there are still some gender-related problems but mostly it's just a few assholes ruining things for the others and, fuck them, we'll live a mostly good life no matter what they say.

 

In the US (as far as I dare suppose): Some probably say the same as above, others - think rightards - say more or less the opposite... but what is how things really are? Given the babble belt and its myriad kinds of insanity I'm (sadly) sure there's more misogyny in (parts of) the US than there is here in Germany, but is it that crappy everywhere, all the time? And how much of the misogynist crap you hear of every day did you hear about personally, without the middle-man of media who need shock and awe and conflict to get their clicks / audiences / sold papers and, these days, will stop at nothing, tell any bullshit, to get this?

 

Again, I'm not saying that gender discrimination doesn't exist at all... but can you US folks say with confidence that it's really as bad as the media make it seem?

 

(And let's not forget that, if people can and do earn money by talking and writing about gender issues, no matter whether on "the women's side" or "the men's side"... they are kind of motivated to stay in business, aren' they? If gender discrimination would suddenly just poof out of existence (YAY!)... would they all rejoice and find something else to do, or would they... do something different to keep their source of income?)

 

Damn this complex real life, is what I'm saying. Why can't it be as simple as in all the stories, at least sometimes?!

[R. S. Martin]

As a woman, I've always been turned off women's studies and feminism. I can't stand men-haters because in my opinion men are people, too. Equality, YES! But hating someone for the body they were born with, NO!

 

Admittedly, since this is such a strong bias by me, I have avoided enough study to form an informed opinion, even though certain courses I took had compulsory feminist components. I just endured them and moved on. Maybe it's the way my mother treated my dad. Every time he got enthused about something fun, she throw a bucket full of cold water on it by whining, "But what about the poor woman?" That stopped his adventure stories cold. He could never travel or even tell adventure stories because of her attitude. That did not seem like gender equality to me but like man-hater.

[Lilith666]

I used to call myself a feminist, when I was angry at the Church for being anti-woman. I am one in the traditional sense (I believe in equality, respect, and just human decency), but I don't like modern feminism. I agree with some things they say: women need reproductive rights, and the concepts of masculine and feminine roles that we should follow hurt both women and men. But they can never explain how men still have power over women in America (don't know about the rest of the West), or justify the claim that being male makes a person complicit in rape culture. Also, this movement is trying to take responsibility for taking care of themselves away from women. Yes, if a man is sober and has sex with a drunk woman, then that is wrong because she was unable to consent to sex. BUT. That woman is an adult and made the choice to get drunk. It's not that she was drinking; it's that she drank too much, which is unhealthy, rape or not. Yes, the man who raped her should be held accountable. But women need to take care of themselves, instead of trusting that everyone else is a decent person who will not take advantage of her, and might even call her a cab home. The fact is you can't trust people and therefore should be making decisions accordingly. If I were to go walking down a back street alone at night unnecessarily and were attacked, even though it's the fault of the attacker that it happened, I need to recognize that I used poor judgment. So anyway. Feminism isn't doing women any favors by coddling them and saying it's okay, you don't need to act like an adult, it's other people's job to make sure nothing happens to you!

 

YOUR job is to watch out for yourself. Third-wave feminism teaches that responsibility for you gets passed from your shoulders to someone else's; all you have to do is sit back and enjoy yourself because you SHOULD be able to get drunk with no consequences. (In a perfect world, we could, but that's not how it is.) This goes for both women and men. Men need to look out for themselves too. So why does the rule of using common sense not apply when it comes to women and sexual assault? This isn't helping anyone. It's turning women into children who can't and shouldn't have to take care of themselves.

 

I feel differently about clothing. Anyone should be able to wear what they want (within reason) without attracting rude behavior and most certainly not the assumption that "she wants it." That is insane.

 

But yes, I think a good portion of modern feminism's agenda is unrealistic and whiny. Having a penis doesn't make anyone a woman-oppressor or part of the patriarchy.

 

[Bhim]

YOUR job is to watch out for yourself. Third-wave feminism teaches that responsibility for you gets passed from your shoulders to someone else's; all you have to do is sit back and enjoy yourself because you SHOULD be able to get drunk with no consequences. (In a perfect world, we could, but that's not how it is.) This goes for both women and men. Men need to look out for themselves too. So why does the rule of using common sense not apply when it comes to women and sexual assault? This isn't helping anyone. It's turning women into children who can't and shouldn't have to take care of themselves.

 

This is an interesting observation.  I might not have seen it as an attempt to remove any personal responsibility from woman, but I think I can understand this interpretation.

 

Blaming the victim is never a preferable approach, whether it's a women's issue or something unrelated, such as nerds getting beat up on playgrounds for flaunting their superior intelligence.  But I feel that the very existence of a "blame the victim" culture is manufactured. Or, at least, I've never experienced it. When I was in college I never heard my fellow men comment that women who dress provocatively are somehow culpable for their own rape (even when said men were drunk and speaking BS).  If anyone has polling data on this, I'd be very interested to know if the attitude that feminists are so afraid of is really prevalent.

 

What I really worry about is that the feminist movement creates fake women's issues instead of addressing real ones.  They have an unnatural fixation with rape on college campuses (because that's the only place where women live, apparently), fueled by the discredited statistic that one in five college women suffers sexual assault.  On the other hand, I see very little attention paid to what I think would be a more important women's issue: the dearth of women in mathematical sciences and engineering.  This gender disparity is not due to an institutional unwillingness to admit women, but is a recruitment problem caused by the steering of girls away from mathematical topics at younger ages.  Professors at my department tried like hell to recruit female graduate students, and rolled out the red carpet for female candidates on those rare occasions when they were hiring a tenure-track professor.  Education in the sciences can lead to higher-paying jobs and greater economic independence for women. Why don't feminists spend their political capital on this, a topic that actually matters and which could have great benefit for American women?  If a feminist is interested in freeing women from dependence on men, then it seems to me that this would be a critical issue.

 

I speculate that the reason no one cares about this is because campus rape makes for a more emotionally-appealing issue.  After all, who doesn't hate frat boys?