Feminism Thread

[Kohan]

Jesus christ lol

Would you disagree? I believe it is unfortunate, but you will find both men and women who believe that's all a feminist is. As mentioned, the term has been permanently tarnished both by extremists, and the stereotype that they popularized. That and the preceding dislike for feminists created a perfect storm.

So it's either an insulting label that is used to put down those who identify with it or... a label that doesn't mean anything because those who apply the label to themselves are as varied as the rainbow.

Why is anyone using it anymore?

There are people who want the original term and its robust history to be respected, but it can be difficult, due to the aforementioned social definition. However, I believe that your reaction to the second part of my statement—that it cannot be quantified—operated under the assumption that identification is problematic due to the variety of feminists. That's not it. Logic and a general march toward progress dictate that more people who would identify as feminists would not be extremist, much as most religious individuals aren't vehemently bigoted, most gays don't hate straight people, and so on. It's more so that feminism is not centralized, so you could not accurately tabulate how many there are.

As for how adequate its usage is, it's a word that's firmly embedded in the English-speaking world's language—one that you might automatically affix to a cause involving women because, well, "isn't that feminism?" is what the average brain would come to. That, and as mentioned, people who are liberal and familiar with the history of feminism likely have far less of a problem with the word than they do its interpretation.

[archibaldcrane]

Would you disagree? I believe it is unfortunate, but you will find both men and women who believe that's all a feminist is. As mentioned, the term has been permanently tarnished both by extremists, and the stereotype that they popularized. That and the preceding dislike for feminists created a perfect storm.

I dunno man. I like, went to college, and have friends and relatives that aren't totally trashy and terrible. So, no, that's not how I define feminism, nor do I even recognize that definition, outside of ragers on internet message boards.

It bears no resemblance to my upper-middle-class educated white person life.

Maybe step your life-game up a bit, it's pretty sweet up here.

[Kohan]

I dunno man. I like, went to college, and have friends and relatives that aren't totally trashy and terrible. So, no, that's not how I define feminism, nor do I even recognize that definition, outside of ragers on internet message boards.

It bears no resemblance to my upper-middle-class educated white person life.

Maybe step your life-game up a bit, it's pretty sweet up here.

I admit that I don't understand how the second part of your post ties into the first. Regardless, the beginning shows that you don't disagree about the definition existing—even if you don't personally recognize it. I don't see anything wrong with that, as I agree that it is an ignorant definition.

[Kerberoz]

Why is anyone using it anymore?

The same reason there are still objectivists. They just turned 19 and want to appear sophisticated to the hicks at home.

[Charismatic]

I was talking about the less crazy ones who don't necessarily hate men but believe that societal problems are caused necessarily by men (by proxy of the patriarchy) and systemic injustice.

Do I post this here?
http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admi...lling-prophecy

lol (muh patriarchy)

Also, big laughs at the idea that misandy does not exist.
That very sentiment only contributes to it.

[Manako]

more links, not a huge fan of the second one (suggest skimming) it does have a few interesting thoughts.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/...volent-sexism/
http://noodlemaz.wordpress.com/2013/...er-misogynist/

I certainly agree with the idea that "Feminist" has a lot of negative connotation, and previously would never have labeled myself as such. I don't want to be treated any differently on account of my gender. On the other hand, growing up I avoided stereotypically gendered things to a fault because it didn't fit in with what I had considered appropriate considering my other hobbies. I grew up playing with Barbies as well as Legos and only recently do I realize that its OK to admit I liked playing with dolls as well as micromachines. At GDC there was a panel for the #1reasontobe topic that had flooded twitter a few months ago, if there is a transcript somewhere I would recommend people check it out. I think the entire panel presented a nice well-rounded package, a lot of the articles are focused on the writer's own goals. A lot of women feel that their worst enemy is actually other women, being either more derogative than men or denying their opinion if it differs from their own.

[Tyrath]

lol (muh patriarchy)

Also, big laughs at the idea that misandy does not exist.
That very sentiment only contributes to it.

The sheer hypocrisy is astounding. "Everything in my life that's messed up is because of misogyny but no such thing as misandry for you." Wut?

Everything she applies is so one sided like "Why People Being Shitty to You Is Not the Same as You Being Systematically Disenfranchised"

[archibaldcrane]

Well, to be fair, people are shitty to you (the general man) for reasons other than misandry, almost without exception.

[Charismatic]

Well, to be fair, people are shitty to you (the general man) for reasons other than misandry, almost without exception.

I believe this is blatantly false, actually.
Its just things that you don't consider to be misandry... similar to the subject of benevolent misogyny; there are just simply many things in today's society that are stacked against men that we experience so often but have no problem with simply because they are so commonplace.
Men are objectified in a different manner than women but it doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

Men are measured by success, women are measured by sexual attributes.
Men are the "protectors and heroes"
Men are human doings rather than human beings... we are shamed for having feelings. Shamed for public displays of affection.

I don't blame women for this, I don't blame men for this, I don't blame "the establishment" for this. As I understand the cause of most 'oppression' (if you really want to call it that) of both men and women to be that these roles were deemed by humans (read: both men and women) to be necessary for survival in a period where living in this world was much more harsh than it is today.
Women were at one point a precious commodity that needed to protected and in a sense men were disposable as a couple of men could impregnate many women just as well as many men could. In recognizing this, we formed societies that protected and coddled women leaving them away while men went and "did."

We've still not moved past this for men and aren't moving away from it either. We are and have been for women.

The idea that there's a patriarchy that oppresses women specifically is absurd to me because of the fact that I believe what is seen as such:

1) Is a construct created by men and women
2) Is perpetuated by men and women
3) Provides advantages for men and women
4) Provides disadvantages for men and women

[Lucavi]

It bears no resemblance to my upper-middle-class educated white person life.

I want one of those. Go go reincarnation~

[Charismatic]

Do I post this here?
http://jezebel.com/5992479/if-i-admi...lling-prophecy

Also going to quote one of the comments that I found particularly interesting with in response to this piece (mostly part four). I could edit this into one of my other posts but I don't feel that its actually closely-related-enough for me to want to do that.
I simply want to share this comment.

Eh... I'm a male feminist and not in favor of MRAs. However, part of the problem I've been finding lately is that while the feminist community totally should be talking about a lot of these problems, and while the logical steps that these problems are part of patriarchy are there and sometimes recognized, I don't find the feminist community actually addressing these problems very often if it all, except to explain that they're part of patriarchy when they're brought up by MRAs.

For the last year or so, as I've gotten pretty much intellectually situated around women's issues, I've turned my attention and curiosity to men's issues and experiences, in part driven by a Michael Kimmel talk I attended and a discussion myself and several of my male friends had regarding how frankly awful the talk was (Guyland is a truly terrible book- he seems to have sought out the worst men in my generation and held them up as the norm; extreme confirmation bias).

As I started exploring men's experiences and problems, though, I found that doing so did not seem particularly welcome in feminist spaces. Often, I would be met with choruses of 'what about teh menz', and accusations that I was attempting to take the focus away from women. Sometimes, I'd bring them up and immediately people would assume I'm a misogynist and an MRA (me, literally the only man on campus who attends the feminist reading group- or, at any rate, did until recently). If I'd ask where we could discuss male issues, I'd be told that if men want to liberate themselves, they should organize as feminists have to do so- but the only male organizations I've found around men's issues seem to be generally opposed by feminists. I was told that feminists were fighting against all gendered oppression and that it was absolutely untrue that the feminist community was opposed to talking about men's issues- but I was met with hostility every time I tried to discuss them.

Often, these issues are entirely denied. When I talk about male-victim rape, I'm told that it's a small, small minority of all rapes (note: a great deal of male-victim rape wasn't even considered rape until last year), or even that men 'can't be raped'. How's that not rape culture? When I tried to bring up the non-consensual cutting of baby penises, the only man in a room full of women, and the only person in that room whose genitals had ever been cut, I was told (by these intact women) that it was misogynistic to oppose the practice because doing so put it on the same level as someone's clitoral hood being cut off, which as we know is much worse than someone's foreskin being cut off. Likewise, when I talk about child abuse, or domestic violence by women- both issues I care deeply about, as I had an abusive, violent mother. The local anti-domestic violence organizing and shelters are all based around women victims. I can't even make a shirt in the clothesline project because my abuser was a woman- my pain 'don't real'. I've tried bringing these up with the feminists around me, and once again I found that they weren't interested in talking about men's issues. Also, regarding divorce, custody, and alimony- hasn't NOW explicitly opposed reforms to these? Frankly, a lot of male issues are either not discussed by feminist circles, or their discussion is actually verboten.

Insofar as discussion of men's issues is allowed in feminist circles, it seems to be primarily focused on how men are to blame for men's issues- how men's self policing (and never women's gender-policing of men) enforces these gender roles, and how men in government set the policies that hurt men on the ground (as we know, the assorted plutocrats of government are always concerned with the well-being of the men under their rule and do their bidding, because their interests are one and the same). It's books like Guyland, bashing young men and telling them to Man Up and stop being man-children and find a woman to be a husband for when she decides she needs one (really, that is the book in a nutshell- it's terrible). It's articles like Hugo Schwyzer's, blaming every conceivable problem men face on male insecurity and urging us to be better in our attention to... women's issues. It's articles like this, which starts off telling men that they're turning 'hating men' into a self-fulfilling prophecy (don't turn us against you, even though even a male feminist trying to discuss men's issues can tell we're already pretty much against you), goes on to say that men's problems are just 'human problems', not specifically male problems, then (disregarding what it just said about the non-existence of male-specific problems), goes on to discuss the actual men's issues that really matter for just long enough to.... chide other people for bringing up men's issues. There's also the overriding message, throughout the discussion of men's issues in feminism, that if we just focus on taking care of women's issues, men's issues will resolve themselves without us explicitly paying any real attention to them.

There is rarely ever explicit acknowledgement that our gender role system is upheld and enforced by both men and women. In addition, men's problems and women's benefits are generally viewed as flukes of the system, rather than features. Women's problems are taken as proof of systemic oppression of women, and men's problems are also taken as proof of systemic oppression of women. Men's benefits are called privileges, where women's benefits are called benevolent sexism. It might be all well and good that the reason a man is pressured to go off to war and die, or denied concern for his homelessness or health problems, or stuck in a coal mine or a fishing boat to die, is because people view him as strong- but I'd rather be alive and viewed as a real person with vulnerabilities, than dead and viewed as an iron man. Dying is not privilege. Living while someone else dies is not benevolent sexism- it is privilege. These problems that men face under our gender system are unlike any sort of problem that, say, white people face under racism or heterosexuals face under heterosexism. We have a system here that is upheld and enforced by both men and women, and which presents different oppressions and privileges to both men and women. But, we can't really honestly engage in the men's issues, because we seem to think of this system as being one designed by men to keep women down, rather than one evolved in society in a way that hurts us all in different ways.

Now, I think it would be fine to have feminism only focus on women's problems, like the Civil Rights Movement focused on African American problems (granted, many of those activists later turned to talking about class problems). However, if feminism is not going to actively engage in men's issues, in an honest and non-insulting way, then the feminist community must permit men to engage in these issues on our own. Granted, the MRAs are not the best way to do this, their movement being infested with outright misogynists. But right now, there are not a lot of spaces where men can talk about men's issues without either being shouted down for taking the focus away from men, or having to rub shoulders with extreme misogynists.

Where can we have a progressive discussion of men's issues? I think the feminist community would be a great place to have them, if that discussion amounted to more than explaining the men that all their problems are caused by themselves and if they liberate women, they will magically become liberated themselves despite the last several decades showing that this does not happen.

[Ksandra]

I love that quote, so much.

[GoggleHead]

That's not a quote, that's a thesis.

[archibaldcrane]

The idea that there's a patriarchy that oppresses women specifically is absurd to me because of the fact that I believe what is seen as such:

1) Is a construct created by men and women
2) Is perpetuated by men and women
3) Provides advantages for men and women
4) Provides disadvantages for men and women

The problem is, and I think you'd acknowledge, that women had virtually no collective "power" until, at best, 150 years ago.

Right?

And back then, when women had no collective power, we had things like men being expected to bring home the bacon, be emotionally strong, etc. etc. that you consider to be oppressive towards men.

So if those things persist now, even as women have increasing amounts of power - it's kind of hard to say that those expectations or whatever is now a construct created by women too - because it's the same construct that existed when women were basically chattel. I'm not saying that women don't often reinforce patriarchy - but to say that patriarchy is a source of misandry is a bit pedantic - and still doesn't get to the idea that "misandrist feminists are oppressing men now that they have power!"

[archibaldcrane]

tl;dr I don't know many feminists who strongly espouse ideas that men should be expected to necessarily be primary breadwinners or be without emotion. While there are plenty of women who think these things, I don't think of them to consider themselves feminists.

Feminists don't cause the problems that MRAs complain about.

[Charismatic]

The problem is, and I think you'd acknowledge, that women had virtually no collective "power" until, at best, 150 years ago.

Right?

And back then, when women had no collective power, we had things like men being expected to bring home the bacon, be emotionally strong, etc. etc. that you consider to be oppressive towards men.

So if those things persist now, even as women have increasing amounts of power - it's kind of hard to say that those expectations or whatever is now a construct created by women too - because it's the same construct that existed when women were basically chattel. I'm not saying that women don't often reinforce patriarchy - but to say that patriarchy is a source of misandry is a bit pedantic - and still doesn't get to the idea that "misandrist feminists are oppressing men now that they have power!"

First off, its a good thing I never said that. Right?
Remember the part in my post where I specifically didn't blame anyone for it? I almost feel like trying to engage you in a real conversation on this but based on the fact that you're attacking things I didn't say (and outright said the opposite of) I feel I'd be wasting my time on you with any posts other than this and I'm only even making this one so you don't wonder why I don't continue to engage you further.

[hey]

Feminists don't cause the problems that MRAs complain about.

No true feminist anyway.

[archibaldcrane]

First off, its a good thing I never said that. Right?
Remember the part in my post where I specifically didn't blame anyone for it? I almost feel like trying to engage you in a real conversation on this but based on the fact that you're attacking things I didn't say (and outright said the opposite of) I feel I'd be wasting my time on you with any posts other than this and I'm only even making this one so you don't wonder why I don't continue to engage you further.

You said that women also participated in the creation of "patriarchy", which is mainly what i disagree with. Women have participated in perpetuating the patriarchal environment in which they were raised (to a lesser extent than men), but they had no collective power to help create patriarchy.

[GoggleHead]

No true feminist anyway.

Is that like a Scotsman?

[Waraji]

http://www.brandstoke.com/wp-content....42.01-PM1.png

Feed It!