Are you a feminist?
- Thread starter Switch
- Start date
I'm male and I consider myself a feminist.
I think many heterosexual couples prefer, within the confines of their own private relationships, to establish gender roles with a limited hierarchy, and I think that many people confuse the intimate hierarchy that both partners may choose to consent to as an expression of love and trust with a "natural" hierarchy that "should" exist in the rest of society. I think that confusion is wrong -- one should never confuse the trust a couple express for one-another with the roles that the genders should play in the larger society.
I think many heterosexual couples prefer, within the confines of their own private relationships, to establish gender roles with a limited hierarchy, and I think that many people confuse the intimate hierarchy that both partners may choose to consent to as an expression of love and trust with a "natural" hierarchy that "should" exist in the rest of society. I think that confusion is wrong -- one should never confuse the trust a couple express for one-another with the roles that the genders should play in the larger society.
Of course I am a feminist.
I am a feminist in that I favour equality between the sexes. The term has been corrupted of late by the 'anti-men' brigade who want the situation to swing further and place women in a position of greater power, but that is a shame. True feminism is a noble cause.
Switch
Captain
The issue as I see it is that "feminist" covers an awful lot of ground. At one end of the scale you're looking at propositions with almost universal acceptance in contemporary western society. Then there are mainstream contemporary issues like maternity leave, comparative pay, and the portrayal of women in the media. Then there are more radical notions concerning the relationships between sex, gender, family, society and politics, some of which are dismissive of - or even incompatible with - more mainstream issues and adherents. This is the intersection of feminism with radical politics where words like "patriarchy" abound. And then out on the extreme there are those for whom men are the enemy in a very real war.
It strikes me that on the one hand there are those - particularly women - who are reluctant to identify as feminists because they don't wish to be perceived as radical feminists, and on the other there are those - particularly men - who identify as feminists solely on the basis of accepting the axiom that men and women are equal in dignity and rights. The result is a term which is, ultimately, not very useful. That is, as a noun. As an adjective it fares much better: a feminist film review, a feminist argument against pornography, a feminist take on Darfur. It identifies the lens the author is looking through and lets you know what you're in for.
It strikes me that on the one hand there are those - particularly women - who are reluctant to identify as feminists because they don't wish to be perceived as radical feminists, and on the other there are those - particularly men - who identify as feminists solely on the basis of accepting the axiom that men and women are equal in dignity and rights. The result is a term which is, ultimately, not very useful. That is, as a noun. As an adjective it fares much better: a feminist film review, a feminist argument against pornography, a feminist take on Darfur. It identifies the lens the author is looking through and lets you know what you're in for.
I am a feminist. I believe that men and women are equals.
Nope, I defend my rights as a human being. It doesn't really matter if I'm a woman or not.
There is also the fact that I'm a very strong minded person, this problem never affect me (or the guy would die...painfully...). Plus I don't like the idea of being part of a militant group, baaaaaaaaaah...
There is also the fact that I'm a very strong minded person, this problem never affect me (or the guy would die...painfully...). Plus I don't like the idea of being part of a militant group, baaaaaaaaaah...
Switch
Captain
That it is socially acceptable for a woman to threaten a man in this manner, but not for a man to threaten a woman, is certainly a noteworthy data point for those interested in gender studies.
You know it's just a figure of speach I guess...
Switch
Captain
Of course, but not one that men use. Men say a lot of ugly things, but casually threatening to injure or kill women isn't one of them, whereas the reverse is quite common and barely raises an eyebrow in most contexts. I'm not accusing you of anything, I meant just what I said: that it's an interesting data point from which one can start to think about various issues relating to gender and gender relations.
I think the point is valid, actually. If I said a woman who crossed me would "die... painfully", I'd like to think I'd be called up on it. Whether the discrepancy is valid or not is an entirely different discussion and one I'm not weighing in on, but it is an illustrative example of the remaining differences in gender relations.
Call me jaded, but the word feminist has too many negative connotations these days for me to ever call myself one. I can't help but think of the cliche man haters.
But I am definitely all for equality between the sexes. I don't see any reason not to be. Women are equally as capable as men.
But I am definitely all for equality between the sexes. I don't see any reason not to be. Women are equally as capable as men.
But that's a false equivalency considering how much more common man-on-woman violence is than the other way round. If I go up to a 5-year-old kid in the park and say "I'm going to bash your head in you little shit" that's more alarming than if he says it to me either.
Switch
Captain
But that's a false equivalency considering how much more common man-on-woman violence is than the other way round. If I go up to a 5-year-old kid in the park and say "I'm going to bash your head in you little shit" that's more alarming than if he says it to me either.
Except that you and the 5 year old are inherently not equal, and that is something our society regularly accepts and legislates for - the whole gist of feminism is surely that man/woman is an essentially meaningless distinction except in matters relating to biology. Two adults on equal footing, but one can say things about the other that cannot be acceptably returned?
Um, yes.
The same thing can sound awful coming from one person and harmless from another.
If "egalitarian" were a choice, I'd vote for that. If a woman's rights are infringed upon, I won't stand for that. And if a man's rights are infringed upon, I won't stand for that either. So I do not identify as a feminist, but that is because I am also concerned for men's rights. As a woman, I do not believe I should be concerned for myself to the exclusion of others.
