Feminism - Your thoughts on it.

Jules

There have been a few thread where this word has been thrown around.

I would like to have a discussion on what the poster of this forum think of it and also there views or how they interpret the word and what it means.




Serious conversation.. any off topic conversation/jokes/slagging off = ban!

watna

Well, I don't think it means getting the same things as men, or being the same as men. Men and women are different and nothing can change that. I would think of feminism as women getting the choice to do what they want or not what they want. I.e. if you want to be really career focused, have a senior managerial position and take over the world, that's cool, and if you want to stay at home with your family while your other half works then that's also cool, as long as it's the woman's choice and she is happy doing it.

Mostly I think it's about being being independant and having choices. You can be independent and still have a partner. With my OH everything money wise is 50/50 and I wouldn't have it any other way even if he earned twice as much as me.

Hmm, my brain is functioning slowly today. I hope that makes sense!

SarahSassy

Well for me its simple, it being able to do anything you want and not being stopped because you are a woman.... Feminism is the 'rebellion' against being prejudiced against because you are female...

Its not whether the man has the better job, higher salary etc, its about the woman being entitled to get that job and salary if she is good enough for it.

Its not about women being entitled to sleep around, its about women sleeping around when they can emotionally cope with it and doing it because they want to.

Some men will always think we are the weaker sex but some men will also judge foreigners, women who work, women who holidays without their husbands etc etc... There are prejudiced people in every walk of life but feminism is battling against being prejudiced against for being a laydeeeeeeee...

King of Kings

as a bloke - its about short haired men hating women wanting dominance in society.

for example women who want equality but would still back mothers getting majority custody in marriage breakup.
That kinda thing.

kizzyr

I agree with posts #2 and #3. Its about the freedom and ability to chose whats right for you as a person not you because you are a woman and therefore your choices are limited. I think someone who opts to stay at home with their children is to be as much admired (often think more so, as its one time consuming, demanding non stop job that offers few rewards..........good thing those rewards are well worth having though:)) as someone who makes it to the top of the food chain in a corporate environment.

AckwelFoley

Feminism is about serving the interests of women.

Its not as relevant in todays world, although there are of course some issuse neediing attention

SarahSassy

snyper wrote: »

Feminism is about serving the interests of women.

Nope its about ensuring that those interests are not ignored.

AckwelFoley

SarahSassy wrote: »

Nope its about ensuring that those interests are not ignored.

Potato - potatoe

takola

I'm actually interested in what peareds answer to this is. I agree with sarah sassy.

But in the anti-feminism thoughts thread the things said don't match up. They're opinions. Nothing to do with the definition of feminism above. If it's all about women having a choice in things how is you thinking wanting children is anti feminist? Or that being fat is unattractive?

So.. Can we have the definition of feminism as you see it peared?

SarahSassy

Definition from the webster dictionary

'the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes'

JC 2K3

Feminism - a phoney rebellion against a perceived superiority complex in the minds of modern women.

In realistic terms it's all about rhetoric with idealistic sounding terms like "choice", "independence" etc., with no well defined goals and little practical action or purpose.

Perhaps I'm too cynical and/or naive, but seriously, that's how I see it. What are women actually restricted from doing these days? And if they are restricted from doing anything, what tangible, practical action is being taken?

Gauge

I don't think feminism has anything to do with superiority, however it is a really broad subject as it covers lots of areas that vary very much from one another, and plenty of people will give you a very different definition depending on how it relates to them.

I read a fairly interesting book called Female Chauvinist Pigs which covers people's varying ideas on what they define feminism as. I'd recommend it.

Black Swan

Jules wrote: »

Serious conversation.. any off topic conversation/jokes/slagging off = ban!

OK, for once I'll put on my serious Hat and try to compare and contrast three positions (of many), but make sure you have your boots on, cause I'm shoveling it pretty deep.

Helene Deutsch - neo-Freudian professor and psychoanalyst that believes women are motivated (and feel inferior) by envy of a part of the male anatomy they lack. These feelings of inferiority allows for the domination by men. Largely agrees with the (male dominated) psychology of women, and essentially anti-feminist (although claims otherwise).

Karen Horney - feminist researcher, professor, and author that challenged the male domination of psychology, psychiatry, and philosophy about women, asserting that males were motivated to achieve because they felt separated from the procreation process and were attempting to compensate; i.e., they could not have babies, so they built buildings, gave birth to businesses, etc. This is the flip-side of Helene Deutsch's position and the neo-Freudians.

Corianne Hutt - researcher and professor that studies the biology of behaviour, in particular women's behaviour in comparison with men's, departing greatly from the dichotomous "armchair" arguments of Deutsch and Horney, claiming that the biology is different, therefore, the behaviour is different. It goes without saying that a woman's monthly cycle influences her behaviour, as do other biological differences from men. Likewise, male hormones impact on male behaviour very unlike that of women. Hutt scientifically measured differences in the brain between females and males, concluding that there were specialisations in structures that greatly differentiated the two. These differences were not "better," only different, therefore one sex was not superior to the other. Her research corresponds with the theory: Form follows function.

Of course, all behaviour is not biology, but it does have significant impacts that greatly influence what Peter Berger calls the social construction of reality.

I like the scientific position of Hutt, as well as the saying attributed to the French, "Viva la difference!" between the sexes.

Peared

Takola its not up to me to define feminism. There would be holes found and picked in whatever I came up with. My thread concerned other womens ideas of what is anti feminist. That is to say opinions which have caused other women to level that accusation at me. I believe the word has taken on a life of its own at this stage and one womans understanding of it can be miles away from the others. I have at no stage claimed to be either a feminist or anti feminist. At worst I made a thread with a misleading title. While I accept responsibility for that thread I do not accept it for the opinions contained within it. I thought it would be an interesting subject for the very reason that all our definitions would vary so much.

Blush_01

I think Feminism is a bit sticky really. It's easy, as a woman, to declare that anything I do is done in the name of feminism, even if it's unreasonably biased pro-female bs. That detracts from the real purpose of feminism, in my mind, and unfortunately too many people do that. That weakens the basic principals of feminism. To my mind, feminism is more about equality than supremacy of either sex over the other. Like previous posters have said, rather than women being inferior in terms of employment and educational opportunities to men, as used to happen, it's about having the same opportunities regardless of gender. If you look back far enough in Irish history, women were on a more equal footing (femal Brehons etc.) than in plantation and post-plantation Ireland, right up to recent history. At the same time, some women take it too far and use the past as a stick to beat the present with. For all the chauvenistic pigs out there, there are verging on as many chauvenistic sows.

Feminisim started as a struggle for recognition and equality socially, politically and economically. However, today it tends to get swamped in physical appearance and grooming. We have sufferage. We have some different rights and responsibilities - I'm not well up on maternity benefits and allowances with regard to payment and time, but are they transferrable to men? Why is a mother automatically considered to be the most appropriate primary caregiver in the event of a relationship breakup, until proven otherwise? (And so on...) BUT the important thing is to balance everything. Feminism used to be a ladder constructed to raise women to a height in order to look men in the eye. Unfortunately, it too often gets converted into something to elevate female above male without reason (or is perceived as such) and as such needs a bit of an overhaul in terminology to my mind.

Well, that's just how I understand things - I could be very wrong.

Macha

snyper wrote: »

Feminism is about serving the interests of women.

Its not as relevant in todays world, although there are of course some issuse neediing attention

Not as relevant today?? Never has it been more relevant than today. Sexism hasn't gone away, it has just changed form. It has become more subtle when faced with increasing unacceptance in public and political spheres.

Ask any woman here (or anywhere else) if she has ever felt judged or pigeonholed because of her gender. I doubt you would find one who would say 'never'.

So I have the right to vote - does that mean I have to put up with builders jeering at me when I walk past a building site, making me feel extremely uncomfortable? Does that mean I should silently count my blessings when I go into a gym and get stared at when I go into the weights section?

Do not confuse legal equality with actual equality. May I remind you that when the EU passed a directive on equal pay in the 70s, Ireland asked for a derrogation - we didn't want women to have equal pay- sure jesus, why would we want that? The EU told us we must be having a laugh & ordered us to implement the legislation.

Feminism is as relevant as it ever has been.

JC 2K3

taconnol wrote: »

Ask any woman here (or anywhere else) if she has ever felt judged or pigeonholed because of her gender. I doubt you would find one who would say 'never'.

You could ask men the same, and they'd probably only say "never" to adhere to a societal perception that they feel they have to uphold.

taconnol wrote: »

So I have the right to vote - does that mean I have to put up with builders jeering at me when I walk past a building site, making me feel extremely uncomfortable? Does that mean I should silently count my blessings when I go into a gym and get stared at when I go into the weights section?

That's so trivial.... I sometimes get jeered at when I walk past a group of scumbags and am made feel uncomfortable, I don't overanalyse and overreact to the situation and determine that I'm being discriminated against due to some personal attribute. People of both genders have to face unecessary abuse everyday, it's a sad fact of life, and perhaps there should be some activism against such societal behavior, but such abuse and uncomfortable situations are certainly not something exclusive to women.

Macha

JC 2K3 wrote: »

You could ask men the same, and they'd probably only say "never" to adhere to a societal perception that they feel they have to uphold..

SO basically your argument is that because in your opinion men are unable to admit to experiences of sexism, similar situations against women are irrelevant?? I'm sorry I don't follow.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

That's so trivial.... I sometimes get jeered at when I walk past a group of scumbags and am made feel uncomfortable, I don't overanalyse and overreact to the situation and determine that I'm being discriminated against due to some personal attribute. People of both genders have to face unecessary abuse everyday, it's a sad fact of life, and perhaps there should be some activism against such societal behavior, but such abuse and uncomfortable situations are certainly not something exclusive to women.

Please don't go down the classic route of inferring things incorrectly from what I write. I didn't say that abuse and uncomfortable situations are exclusive to women now, did I?

But I get a lot of comments, leering, etc in the streets and I don't like. And it happens because I am female (not some other miscellaneous personal attribute - straight hair??). It isn't trivial and it can be quite threatening, particularly if there are about 7 of them and 1 of you. Once I lived near a building site and had to resort to walking the long-way around so that I wouldn't face a daily barrage of lewd comments focusing on particular aspects of my body. My brother who lived with me? I think he was barely aware the building site was there at all.

Yes, scumbags can be aggressive but I'm talking about gender-specific discrimination - do you see the difference?

JC 2K3

taconnol wrote: »

SO basically your argument is that because in your opinion men are unable to admit to experiences of sexism, similar situations against women are irrelevant?? I'm sorry I don't follow.

Don't be a hypocrite:

taconnol wrote: »

Please don't go down the classic route of inferring things incorrectly from what I write.

My point is that the concept of feminism as you have described it singles out women as having a disproportionately high level of discrimination/judgement levelled against them as opposed to other groups of people. Such a mindset can create a superiority complex in the minds of women and actually hold them back. It is also not helpful to anyone who is discriminated against for any other reason. It would be much better to work towards universal equality rather than to try and remedy the problems of one particular group.

taconnol wrote: »

Yes, scumbags can be aggressive but I'm talking about gender-specific discrimination - do you see the difference?

Well I suppose different forms of abuse are levelled by scumbags against other people depending on gender. They might shout lewd comments at women, but not at men, and they might start fights with men, but not with women . But ultimately, again, it's a bit trivial. Abuse is abuse, it shouldn't happen, and it's silly to be combatting abuse just levelled against women, rather than abuse in general, against anyone.

Baudelaire

Feminism has bad name at times mainly because it's misunderstood, the an opinion that feminists are man haters (and there is one small section that would fit that discription) has unfortunatly become the overall opinion but the fact is that there is more than one type of feminist, some are still living in the dark ages lots arent:

Liberal feminist - The majority would fall here and all they believe is that men and women are equal and should have the same rights and that's fair enough, they're not burning bras or protesting about silly things, all they want to do is further equality and there's nothing wrong with that in this day and age.

Radical feminist - These are the ones that give feminists a bad name because within this group is a minority of lesbian separatists that would be the ones that put across the idea that all hetrosexual sex acts are acts of voilence against women. Most feminists wouldn't subscribe to that idea anymore but will still recognise all the important work these put in in the early days like setting up rape crisis centres, battered women's shelters and brought to the fore thinks like the possibilty that there can be such a thing as rape in marriage. They do the right things but at times can be to heavy handed in their methods.

Socialist feminist - Sort of different to the other two, their motto would be classed as all men/women are equal and recognise that it's not only men that oppress, women can oppress men and women too.

Postmodern Feminist - These see things a bit differently as in not from the point of view of men v women but more masculinty and feminity and how our patriarchal society can also oppress men or at least men that don't fit into the "Ideal man" opinion. Gender is seen as something that is performed like (sorry lads, I don't mean anything bad here it's just an example) some of the "real man" posts on GBRH or girls liking pink fluffy things as a performance of ones gender.

The truth is feminism of old (all types) has made it possible for women to be femine, pretty, dress nice, wear make-up and still enjoy porn and sex and still fit into the feminist idea.

Not all feminists are hairy arm-pit, bra burning man haters that want to demonise men, but now they have to work themselves to change societies idea of that stereotype. What they are trying to do is achieve social change where society isn't controled by Masculinity or Patriarchy and in effect some men will benefit from it too because some men are oppressed by the same things too.

Macha

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Don't be a hypocrite:

I'm not. I expressed my uncertainty over what you were saying with the question marks and the words 'I don't follow'.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

My point is that the concept of feminism as you have described it singles out women as having a disproportionately high level of discrimination/judgement levelled against them as opposed to other groups of people. Such a mindset can create a superiority complex in the minds of women and actually hold them back. It is also not helpful to anyone who is discriminated against for any other reason. It would be much better to work towards universal equality rather than to try and remedy the problems of one particular group.

Well I suppose different forms of abuse are levelled by scumbags against other people depending on gender. They might shout lewd comments at women, but not at men, and they might start fights with men, but not with women . But ultimately, again, it's a bit trivial. Abuse is abuse, it shouldn't happen, and it's silly to be combatting abuse just levelled against women, rather than abuse in general, against anyone.

Yes - of course I support the eradication of abuse, discrimination, against all groups - racism, etc.

However I disagree with your insinuation above, that disproportionately high levels of discrimination against women as opposed to other groups is little more than a 'concept of feminism'. It is reality.

The UN estimates that 2 out of 5 women will be victims of physical violence at some stage during their lives. This does not include other discrimiation in the form of lower levels of education, lack of women's health facilities, etc. Considering that the world's population is now well over 6bn, that means that over 1.2 billion women will suffer physical violence. That is A LOT of people.

Also, what I find different about discrimination against women is that globally, and in most cases on a community-level, women are actually in the majority! This is normally not the case with other types of discrimination, such as that against immigrants, gays etc.

Different types of discrimination happen for different reasons and I do not think it helps to bandy them all under one big label of 'discrimination'. For example, people who treat women with respect, may have a very negative attitude to immigrants. It comes from different places.

I think discrimination against women is inherently different to other types of discrimination - due to the long history of the discrimination and the sheer extent of it. Therefore, I do think that it should be dealt with seperately to other forms of discrimination WHILE not ignoring the fact that discrimination against other groups in society (including men) exist.

Please explain why you think that highlighting discrimination against women is 'not helpful' to other discriminated groups.

Also, please explain why you think that correctly considering yourself to be at a higher risk of discrimination due to your gender can lead to a superiority complex. Is this based on your own personal experiences/anecdotes? I think you're moving into the realms of feminist stereotypes. And surely the existence of a few self-righteous women is better than 20% of the world's population being victims of phsyical violence due to their gender? Really, there are bigger things at stake here.

Phew

JC 2K3

taconnol wrote: »

However I disagree with your insinuation above, that disproportionately high levels of discrimination against women as opposed to other groups is little more than a 'concept of feminism'. It is reality.

The UN estimates that 2 out of 5 women will be victims of physical violence at some stage during their lives. This does not include other discrimiation in the form of lower levels of education, lack of women's health facilities, etc. Considering that the world's population is now well over 6bn, that means that over 1.2 billion women will suffer physical violence. That is A LOT of people.

I was referring to Ireland/the developed world though.

taconnol wrote: »

Different types of discrimination happen for different reasons and I do not think it helps to bandy them all under one big label of 'discrimination'. For example, people who treat women with respect, may have a very negative attitude to immigrants. It comes from different places.

Well, I agree that it comes from different places, and occurs for different reasons, but it is all still discrimination and I believe it can be all treated as the same. Universal opposition to discrimination rather than single opposition movements against sexism, racism etc. would be a more sensible approach. The message that should be sent out to people is that you shouldn't discriminate against anyone, full stop, not just you shouldn't discriminate against women or black people for example.

taconnol wrote: »

Also, please explain why you think that correctly considering yourself to be at a higher risk of discrimination due to your gender can lead to a superiority complex. Is this based on your own personal experiences/anecdotes? I think you're moving into the realms of feminist stereotypes. And surely the existence of a few self-righteous women is better than 20% of the world's population being victims of phsyical violence due to their gender? Really, there are bigger things at stake here.

Sorry! I meant inferiority complex. I'm always mixing up the two.

the_syco

Baudelaire wrote: »

Feminism has bad name at times mainly because it's misunderstood, the an opinion that feminists are man haters (and there is one small section that would fit that discription) has unfortunatly become the overall opinion but the fact is that there is more than one type of feminist, some are still living in the dark ages lots arent:

...

Radical feminist - These are the ones that give feminists a bad name

Agreed. The way I see is that there is equality and feminism. Masculinity is seen as "machoness" which is now seen as immature or "out of date". Thus, there is the fight to ensure equality between the sexes, and feminism, which will want better rights for women than men.

taconnol wrote: »

The UN estimates that 2 out of 5 women will be victims of physical violence at some stage during their lives.

Does it ssay where? Ireland or Iran?

Oh, and until recently, if a man went into a police station to state that his wife was beating him, he'd be laughed out of the station. I'm not saying that there'd be more men being abused than women, but I am saying that men do get abused.

Macha

JC 2K3 wrote: »

I was referring to Ireland/the developed world though.

Yes - it's probably because I have lived in 3rd world countries that I am v aware of how bad it is elsewhere. Believe me - I agree we have it pretty good in Ireland relative to some places.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Well, I agree that it comes from different places, and occurs for different reasons, but it is all still discrimination and I believe it can be all treated as the same. Universal opposition to discrimination rather than single opposition movements against sexism, racism etc. would be a more sensible approach. The message that should be sent out to people is that you shouldn't discriminate against anyone, full stop, not just you shouldn't discriminate against women or black people for example.

Fair enough. I take your point.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

Sorry! I meant inferiority complex. I'm always mixing up the two.

This can be true - people walking around with a victim syndrome. I'll never forget one day when I was in boarding school. We only had 1 TV for 80 girls (just imagine the fights...). I was watching the TV when a new girl from The Gambia came in and ordered me to give her the remote. When I said no, her reply was 'RACIST!'

Macha

the_syco wrote: »

Does it ssay where? Ireland or Iran?

Oh, and until recently, if a man went into a police station to state that his wife was beating him, he'd be laughed out of the station. I'm not saying that there'd be more men being abused than women, but I am saying that men do get abused.

Worldwide.

I totally agree. Men suffer a different types of abuse. And I think a lot of the abuse of men is more psychological than physical so it is harder to address. Also, there is less awareness of it and as well the attitude that you described above really doesn't help matters.

Actually, the only place I've really heard men tell stories of abuse is on the radio, where they have total anonymity...hmm...not good.

the_syco

taconnol wrote: »

Men suffer a different types of abuse.

Agreed. Where a man can hit a woman, she may need a weapon or poison to hit back.

taconnol wrote: »

Actually, the only place I've really heard men tell stories of abuse is on the radio, where they have total anonymity...hmm...not good.

Although being "macho" is bad, many men fear ridicule from the friends if they admitted to being hit by a woman (no matter how strong said woman is).

Pyjamarama

King of Kings wrote: »

for example women who want equality but would still back mothers getting majority custody in marriage breakup.
That kinda thing.

This is exactly what feminism is not about but the phrase has become so common place and used so much it has lost it's true meaning in popular culture.

Feminism is about equality not dominance. Someone brought up maternity/paternity leave earlier. I think it's a disgrace that it is generally up to the employers discretion whether men get so much as a day's paternity leave.

To say feminism is irrelevant today is also rubbish. Things in the Western world have gotten better but what about in developing countries - do you think their is equality worldwide? Hardly. There is still a long way to go in terms of every section of society being equal. It was not that long ago that women were not full citizens in the Irish constitution! Feminist thought still has an impotant role to play.

Feminism is about more than just equality of the sexes these days, it is about equality regardless of gender, ethnicity, sexual preference etc. People may say that this is diluting the original concept but it is necessary to broaden the scope. Women from different ethnic groups felt that the Anglo-American feminist school of thought had ignored women of ethnicity in their theories and fought back. Black Feminist Thought by Patricia Hill Collins is a good book on this.

biko

Feminism to me is not having to read articles like this

Sexual discrimination in pay and promotion is widespread in Ireland, a trade union conference heard today.

Speaking at the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (Ictu) biennial conference in Donegal, vice president Rosheen Callender said many people were under the misapprehension that gender inequality was a thing of the past.

"Despite all the hard work of trade unionists over recent decades, we are still not even accurately measuring the extent of gender inequality in Ireland - never mind removing it."

She said the pay gap between men and women was 25 per cent when the first European directive on equal pay was adopted in this State and that, 30 years later, it is still about 15 per cent.

Macha

I read an analysis of the gender pay gap, which discussed apprenticeships. It showed that starting from a very young age, women tend to be pushed towards lower-paid jobs, such as hairdressing, while men move into engineering and mechanics - better paid jobs. So straight of education - be it an IT, university, whatever, women are earning less.

Add in time off for having children and the difficulty in re-entering the labour market (lack of flexible working conditions, etc) and it's easy to see how women start to fall behind. hat's why all women should start pensions now!! Think of all the years you may not be earning!

Although ironically, it's due to the lack of paternity leave that mean women are the ones who have to take the time off after the birth. Another example of how Ireland's pathetic pigeon-holing of the genders makes it harder for men and women. Now in Norway, men have to take a month off and can be off work for up to 8 months.

Weidii

I've encountered a few feminists and to me they're about pressuring women into working instead of minding their children and making them feel ashamed for living at home while their kids are growing up. They have also tried to make other women feel inadequate for not having as high a salary as their husband.

To be honest, in this day and age feminism should not be necessary. It can be just as bad as male chauvanism.

ali.c

the_syco wrote: »

Does it ssay where? Ireland or Iran?

In ireland its *only* 1/5 so we arent exactly doing a whole lot better

womens aid website wrote:

Almost 1 in 5 Irish Women have experienced Domestic Violence by a current or former intimate partner or husband (Making the Links, 1995). And that's just the reported cases. It is likely that we all know someone who has suffered this cruel treatment. It's also likely that she hasn't felt able to tell us.