Are you a feminist?

Czarcasm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

That'd be fine, if so many feminists didn't (a) insist that feminism was inclusive of all gender issues, and more problematically that (b) because of this, any other movements which fight for equality from any other angle are somehow invalid, irrelevant, or even harmful.

It's a can't have your cake and eat it situation, I'm afraid. Either feminism is inclusive of all gender issues, or else men have every right to set up a separate movement to advocate for their own rights. At the moment, mainstream feminism claims to be inclusive while denouncing mens' rights organizations and egalitarians.

And what's your own idea of feminism Patrick? You're intelligent enough to see it for what it is, because you're capable of criticising what feminism means to someone else.

Men of course have every right to set up a separate movement to advocate for their own rights, and I would recommend that they do, but they should also be aware that awareness and support doesn't happen overnight. Do you honestly think you are promoting egalitarianism by denouncing feminism? Nah, that just looks like you care more about advocating for ideologies than you do about representing, advocating, and providing leadership for the people you claim to care about.

kowloon

jill_valentine wrote: »

One is a subset of the other. Egalitarianism is the hill to be climbed, but one expedition is having to start much further down the mountain.

How about having the one expedition from the beginning? :pac:

Tarzana wrote: »

... But I think that feminism still exists as a movement because there is a fear that without feminism, we will slip back into massive inequality for women...

Do you think fear of oppression from the likes of Radical Islam fuels some of this?
Not trying to stir up religious debate, but I don't think many would argue that places like Saudi are fair.

Czarcasm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

And that, in many people's view, is exactly what makes it a sexist movement.

I agree with you Patrick actually -

Czarcasm wrote: »

I view feminism as something that is a positive ideology for women, the view that they assert their femininity, that they advocate for, support, and encourage women to assert themselves, not to compete with men, but simply to show leadership to women.

The current 'modern feminist' ideology is an utter clusterfcuk of social injustices and ideologies. The word 'feminist' has become meaningless and diluted as modern feminists are also afraid of being seen as sexist!

The cognitive dissonance of the social justice warrior.

Me on the other hand, I have no problem with being seen as sexist. I could never be egalitarian, feminist, masculinist or any of the rest of that social justice warrior label nonsense.

hatrickpatrick

Czarcasm wrote: »

And what's your own idea of feminism Patrick? You're intelligent enough to see it for what it is, because you're capable of criticising what feminism means to someone else.

I personally believe that right now, mainstream feminism is a movement which advocates for womens' issues, and (in my opinion) is a little too willing to sacrifice general freedoms in pursuance of this goal. But it is not an all-inclusive movement for gender equality.

Men of course have every right to set up a separate movement to advocate for their own rights, and I would recommend that they do, but they should also be aware that awareness and support doesn't happen overnight.

Well then we're in agreement! Unfortunately, many feminists do not agree with your statement, and either claim that men have no legitimate issues to fight for or else that they should do so under the banner of "feminism". Both answers are of course ridiculous.

Do you honestly think you are promoting egalitarianism by denouncing feminism? Nah, that just looks like you care more about advocating for ideologies than you do about representing, advocating, and providing leadership for the people you claim to care about.

Not necessarily. I believe in egalitarianism but I see feminism as being a rather harmful and oppressive movement. Look at the numerous campaigns to silence, ban, censor and rewrite comments, speeches, songs, movies etc which they find "offensive" to see why. Feminism has taken on, in recent years, a very nasty PC element claiming the right to never be offended, or more specifically, the right to destroy or silence that which offends. Most young people (at least, most young people I know) will never get behind such a movement, having grown up during the 90s and 00s - a time of unprecedented "unmoderation" in society.

EDIT: I do believe you and me are in broad agreement about the first point raised here. Surely this first and possibly once in a lifetime occurrence merits a celebration of some kind?

Tarzana

kowloon wrote: »

m the likes of Radical Islam fuels some of this?
Not trying to stir up religious debate, but I don't think many would argue that places like Saudi are fair.

I'm fairly ignorant of Islamism, TBH, so not a clue.

It's just, it hasn't been long enough, change comes slowly, it needs another generation or so.

kowloon

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

EDIT: I do believe you and me are in broad agreement about the first point raised here. Surely this first and possibly once in a lifetime occurrence merits a celebration of some kind?

Take it to PM :pac:

hatrickpatrick

kowloon wrote: »

Take it to PM :pac:

Not that kind of celebration! :eek:

Czarcasm

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Not that kind of celebration! :eek:

<_<

>_>




Ah no, I kid, I kid, but we've always been broadly in agreement Patrick, just we would have different approaches. I'm not so concerned with rights and so on for either gender, I'm concerned with supporting people and providing opportunities for them, regardless of their gender.

That's why it got me so angry when I was talking about suicide, and that woman I mentioned earlier pipped up "women". I knew exactly what she was getting at, I knew where she was coming from, but when I'm giving a talk on the numbers of young people who have taken their own lives, and all she cares about is that I check my adjectives...

I will admit though that the sexist part of me wouldn't have hesitated to let fly with the microphone had it been a man who chose to miss the point so spectacularly.

GalwayGuy2

kowloon wrote: »

Take it to PM :pac:

And then to bed.

Hell, let's all take this argument to the bedroom

GalwayGuy2

That's why it got me so angry when I was talking about suicide, and that woman I mentioned earlier pipped up "women". I knew exactly what she was getting at, I knew where she was coming from, but when I'm giving a talk on the numbers of young people who have taken their own lives, and all she cares about is that I check my adjectives...

It reminds me of the Yes all women hashtag on twitter. The top results were complaining about men hijacking it and arm-pit hair.

Sorry, but there's bigger issues than that.

Pwindedd

12 pages in and we seem to be keeping it relatively civil. There's a lot of strong opinion clearly - some interesting points have been raised - points I would never have considered before. (I'm still a feminist btw - subset of egalitarianism anyone?) I have a better understanding of the negative image it has - I do tend to live in a bubble sometimes and idealise everything - and let's be honest I don't actually fight for ANY causes personally so I'm probably terribly hypocritical too.

Regarding the #yesallwomen campaign - I genuinely feel great envy at any woman that feels they didn't identify with it because they hadn't been on the receiving end of sexual abuse or unwanted sexual attention - I wish I could say the same - you lucky girls, and let's face it luck has a large part to play in that. It's origins seem terribly misguided though - as it stemmed from the shootings in California, an isolated case of a damaged person, with mental health issues, who had a warped view of his place in the world. He was completely unbiased in who he killed, more men than women in fact. The ultimate irony. I saw the #yesallpeople and #notallmen comments and how they were being attacked for also voicing an opinion, and this thread came to mind. An unholy cluster**** is dead right, to quote my czarcastic friend.

Shakespeare's Sister

Napoleonbonbon wrote: »

No it's not strange, you're missing the point.

If someone says they have X beliefs yet their actions contradict their stated beliefs then people are perfectly enitled to point out their hypocricy whether they care about X beliefs or not.

I don't give a sh1t about spider rights, but if a group says its their goal to give spiders improved rights I will call them bullsh1tters if their actions don't align with their stated goals and beliefs.

But I acknowledged that. I said it's disingenuous to say feminism is about equality, not just women's rights. What I also said though was it's strange for people who aren't involved with the men's rights movement to complain about the movement not being taken seriously by other people.

The_Captain wrote: »

I find it strange that the women who have benefited most from the feminism of the past are the least likely to be feminists today.

A smart woman with a third level education, good job and social freedom doesn't feel oppressed or held back by her gender, so has little to no interest in campaigning for equality.

I think some who don't have this will excuse their personal failings with the idea that they're oppressed or victimised.

I think if it wasn't for feminism I wouldn't have what I have, so while it's a long time since we couldn't vote, work, get an education, I'll still have a bit of time for women's rights (not anything that facilitates man-hating); don't think there's anything wrong with that.

Sleepy wrote: »

In my experience, pretty much every feminist has a different idea of what feminism is supposed to mean to women. It's one of the movements greatest problems: to some it's the freedom to choose to be a stay-at-home mother / educated professional / sex-worker, to others it's the "freedom" to prevent others from doing any or all of those things.

This is why it's annoying when people have been piping up "Modern feminism is all about man-hating" and scurrying off. It's a big mish-mash of differing ideas so I don't see how they can come to such a simplistic conclusion.

Shakespeare's Sister

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

The #YesAllWomen hashtag currently doing the rounds on Twitter is the perfect example of the arrogance which pervades today's feminism. It claims, in response to the claim that "not all men" are potential rapists, that "yes all women" are victims of sexism / assault / harassment / whatever.

Now if feminists want to play a victim card that's fine, and if they feel they have a legitimate claim to it then that's fine as well and by all means let them justify it or wear it. But as one girl friend of mine reacted when this hashtag came up in conversation, "don't you dare presume to speak for me or tell me what my life is like, or how I'm supposed to feel about it."

This is why young women as well as men are turning their backs.

That campaign has a strong element of demonising men. I saw one tweet "I have to turn down the volume of the music I'm listening to while out running so I am on the alert for lurking rapists."
I hope it was someone taking the piss. "Lurking rapists"?

kiffer

Magaggie wrote: »

That campaign has a strong element of demonising men. I saw one tweet "I have to turn down the volume of the music I'm listening to while out running so I am on the alert for lurking rapists."
I hope it was someone taking the piss. "Lurking rapists"?

Have you seen the "You are Schrödimger's rapist" one?
Basically until you prove you're not a rapist, you have to be considered as a potential rapist, also you might not have raped anyone in the past but what if you raped someone in the future... so all men are potential rapist and it is impossible to prove aren't/won't be actual rapists.

"You may or may not be a man who would commit rape. I won’t know for sure unless you start sexually assaulting me. I can’t see inside your head, and I don’t know your intentions."

Shakespeare's Sister

kiffer wrote: »

Have you seen the "You are Schrödimger's rapist" one?
Basically until you prove you're not a rapist, you have to be considered as a potential rapist, also you might not have raped anyone in the past but what if you raped someone in the future... so all men are potential rapist and it is impossible to prove aren't/won't be actual rapists.

"You may or may not be a man who would commit rape. I won’t know for sure unless you start sexually assaulting me. I can’t see inside your head, and I don’t know your intentions."

FFS.

This sh-t only helps further any divide.

tritium

kiffer wrote: »

Have you seen the "You are Schrödimger's rapist" one?
Basically until you prove you're not a rapist, you have to be considered as a potential rapist, also you might not have raped anyone in the past but what if you raped someone in the future... so all men are potential rapist and it is impossible to prove aren't/won't be actual rapists.

"You may or may not be a man who would commit rape. I won’t know for sure unless you start sexually assaulting me. I can’t see inside your head, and I don’t know your intentions."

Christ that's just messed up!

It shows the power of social media, and to a lesser extent the influence some these groups have, that crap like this can gain any momentum.

iwantmydinner

I am a feminist.

I am a woman, white, straight, Irish, and come from a background that's closer to working-class than middle-class but my education means I'll be far better off than my parents. I realise that the feminists of previous generationshave done the bulk of the work for me; while nothing has been handed to me, I have had plenty of opportunities.

So why am I feminist?

Because I'm seen by my government as a walking incubator, who must be ready at any point to drop everything to carry a pregnancy to term. Even a pregnancy which I know will result in a dead baby.

Because the assumption is that my educational achievements and career success is hollow because I'm single. "Wow your new job sounds great, you'll definitely meet a man there"

Because as the only woman at a meeting in a previous job, I was the one expected to make the ****ing tea. PS I was chairing the meeting.

Because aggressive nightclub groping. Please understand that what I'm talking about here goes far above and beyond "normal" dance floor contact. And the even more aggressive response to my natural reaction of "fcuk the fcuk off"

Because it's assumed that my parents were desperately hoping for a son but "ended up" with four daughters. Sure what good are daughters to a farmer?

Because on a street at night, I'm considered an easy target.

Because if I am attacked, I'll be asked what I was wearing. I'll be asked about my sexual history. I'll be asked if I fought back.

I could literally write a book. If all that sounds trite to you, come back to me when you've spent 28 years living with it. Every. Damn. Day.

And that's all before we get to the position of women in countries far away from safe little Ireland. Anyone who still thinks feminism is no longer necessary...





Of course, I have to add in here the usual "I'm not a man hater" clause. I support the removal of the bias towards the mother in family law cases. As for prison, I think the whole prison system needs review - it's not working for men or women. The issue of suicide in young men needs urgent appraisal and addressing. Being a feminist doesn't mean I don't care about these things.

GalwayGuy2

Magaggie wrote: »

FFS.

This sh-t only helps further any divide.

And i dont' think it's a leap in logic to say that comments like those increase the fear that women feel?

tritium

Magaggie wrote: »

That campaign has a strong element of demonising men. I saw one tweet "I have to turn down the volume of the music I'm listening to while out running so I am on the alert for lurking rapists."
I hope it was someone taking the piss. "Lurking rapists"?

The ironic thing about the #yesallwomen campaign is that, as we frequently see in AH many feminists will criticise men if they comment in a feminism thread, accusing them of whataboutery and making it about men. And here we have a campaign that does exactly the reverse, taking #notallmen and applying the 'what about women' to it-whataboutery at its finest.

I suspect irony is lost on some feminists

iwantmydinner

tritium wrote: »

The ironic thing about the #yesallwomen campaign is that, as we frequently see in AH many feminists will criticise men if they comment in a feminism thread, accusing them of whataboutery and making it about men. And here we have a campaign that does exactly the reverse, taking #notallmen and applying the 'what about women' to it-whataboutery at its finest.

I suspect irony is lost on some feminists

Is that all that you took from the campaign? Serious question. Did the experiences recounted make any impression on you?

py2006

iwantmydinner wrote: »

I am a feminist.

I am a woman, white, straight, Irish, and come from a background that's closer to working-class than middle-class but my education means I'll be far better off than my parents. I realise that the feminists of previous generationshave done the bulk of the work for me; while nothing has been handed to me, I have had plenty of opportunities.

So why am I feminist?

Because I'm seen by my government as a walking incubator, who must be ready at any point to drop everything to carry a pregnancy to term. Even a pregnancy which I know will result in a dead baby.

Because the assumption is that my educational achievements and career success is hollow because I'm single. "Wow your new job sounds great, you'll definitely meet a man there"

Because as the only woman at a meeting in a previous job, I was the one expected to make the ****ing tea. PS I was chairing the meeting.

Because aggressive nightclub groping. Please understand that what I'm talking about here goes far above and beyond "normal" dance floor contact. And the even more aggressive response to my natural reaction of "fcuk the fcuk off"

Because it's assumed that my parents were desperately hoping for a son but "ended up" with four daughters. Sure what good are daughters to a farmer?

Because on a street at night, I'm considered an easy target.

Because if I am attacked, I'll be asked what I was wearing. I'll be asked about my sexual history. I'll be asked if I fought back.

I could literally write a book. If all that sounds trite to you, come back to me when you've spent 28 years living with it. Every. Damn. Day.

And that's all before we get to the position of women in countries far away from safe little Ireland. Anyone who still thinks feminism is no longer necessary...

I could reply to this with some 'whataboutary' but I won't. Ok, I will a bit...

A lot of this works both ways, which feminism doesn't seem to recognise.

There are elements of the law that are extremely sexist and discriminatory towards men. There is (and has been) expectancy on me in the work place because of my gender (including putting up with sexist comments, being asked to move things/lift things and comments made about my jeans which were a little fitted in a certain area at the time).

I am more likely to be attacked violently as a man walking down the street at night alone and I have also been groped in a nightclub on a couple of occasions and I rarely went to them. I am sure if I went more frequently and I was a bit better looking it would have happened a lot more. I have also been in circumstances were a strange woman placed her hand on mine on a bus, I have had an older female colleague wrap her arms around me inappropriately and I was extremely uncomfortable with it at the time. Yet if I reported any of that I would be laughed at, not believed or told to man up or grow a pair etc.

So my point to you is that feminism largely ignores all that and makes that dramatic assumption that only women are victims and in some instances gets quite offended at the suggestion that men can be victims.

Please don't take that as a dismissal of your experiences.

tritium

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Is that all that you took from the campaign? Serious question. Did the experiences recounted make any impression on you?

If I was being pedantic I might respond with: when all those allegations of whataboutery are flying about here, do any of the feminists on here actually in any meaningful sense give a flying fcuk about the real issues being raised by men here?

If I was being pedantic....

But to answer your question. I found the experiences to be a mixed bag based on the small number I've seen (not really a tweeter). I don't doubt that women experience sexism. However the #yesallwomen hash tag has become a mix of genuine heartbreaking experiences and rants some of which are utterly misandrist or pure victim mentality (interspersed with some men getting hot under the colar about it all).

I do however think that a campaign like that fortifies a victim mentality whereby anything can be construed as sexism, regardless of whether that's the intent ("... because my insurance covered payment for viagra and not for my birth control pills." Seriously? Change your fcuking insurer! But assuming its because theyre sexist....) I'd argue that the most proactive way to deal with sexism (whether its towards a man or a woman) is to confront it (I know that's not always possible).

So a question back at you- do you think its a legitimate tactic to hijack the #notallmen? Do you see what the purpose if that is or why men would feel the need to be part of that?

donfers

I admire real feminists, like women in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan or Pakistan who face real and serious issues and are victims of some awful and terrible gender-based discrimination and crimes.

But western feminism has turned me off in a big way - there are still a few issues faced by both men and women in the western world related to gender discrimination but the vast vast majority of rights/opportunities/laws etc. are fully available to men and women

two issues in particular nag at me about the feminism industry in the western world

1. Now that laws and regulations are in place to deal with gender discrimination there is an increasing focus by some feminist campaigners on "thought crime" - whenever any kind of political vehicke starts venturing into that territory I start thinking they've got too much time and power on their hands and should be investing it elsewhere (like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. where women are stoned publically for affairs - surely that's a more pressing concern than if a guy didn't avert his gaze from your cleavage quickly enough or if he used the word "bossy" or "darling")

2. The victim card is overplayed and it is tremendously damaging to genuine cases of discrimination/inequality. She doesn't get a job promotion, the waiter at the restaurant isn't nice to her, the barman doessn't serve her first etc. etc., in some of these instances the temptation for the one-eyed feminist is to say misogyny everywhere and blame it for everything. But if a white male doesn't get a job promotion or if the waiter is rude to him or the barman doesn't serve him, he must merely chalk it down to "that's life" and try to deal with the case on its own merits. Feminists need to be more careful about picking their battles or risk alienating the moderate majority who will write them off as a kind of crackpot and delusional whining class.

py2006

Great post donfers and refreshing to read.

I think there was another appalling case yesterday of a woman stoned to death in the middle east.

mrkiscool2

Unlike Py who didn't attack your whataboutary, I will. And let me pre-empt you thinking I hate feminists because I am going to agree with you on certain things.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

I am a feminist.

I am a woman, white, straight, Irish, and come from a background that's closer to working-class than middle-class but my education means I'll be far better off than my parents. I realise that the feminists of previous generationshave done the bulk of the work for me; while nothing has been handed to me, I have had plenty of opportunities.

That should be end of the discussion right here IMHO. You have had every opportunity a man has had in a system that favours women. You have equal rights in every single department (by both law and in general). So, if that's what the "original" feminists were fighting for, surely that's the end of the movement? But no, and this proves the point that feminism is an organisation to get women an improved status in society. Also, the phrase "nothing has been handed to me" I don't think you'll find many people who haven't had to work extremely hard for what they have.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

So why am I feminist?

Because I'm seen by my government as a walking incubator, who must be ready at any point to drop everything to carry a pregnancy to term. Even a pregnancy which I know will result in a dead baby.

Whilst I think you are greatly over-exaggerating the point here I agree with you. Women should have bodily autonomy.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Because the assumption is that my educational achievements and career success is hollow because I'm single. "Wow your new job sounds great, you'll definitely meet a man there"

Erm I think this applies to both sexes. Also, I don't think that comment is entirely out of place either. Most people want to find someone they can share their life with. People saying you'll meet a man in your new place of work is not a condescending comment on where and what you do, rather a hope that someone comes into your life to make you happier than you already are-and if that's not what you want that's perfectly cool too. If you don't like people saying it ask them to stop. Simples

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Because as the only woman at a meeting in a previous job, I was the one expected to make the ****ing tea. PS I was chairing the meeting.

Right, so because some assh*les asked you to make tea, all men expect the same thing? I hate when people take massive leaps of assumption. Also, why didn't you tell them to go make their own f*cking tea? Seems like a perfectly rational thing to do!

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Because aggressive nightclub groping. Please understand that what I'm talking about here goes far above and beyond "normal" dance floor contact. And the even more aggressive response to my natural reaction of "fcuk the fcuk off"

Yes, because this never happens men. Just like men don't get raped or sexually abused by women. Also, if a lad starts causing hassle with you in a nightclub you can go tell a bouncer. If a girl is doing it to guy and he tells the bouncer, the bouncer will either laugh in his face or tell him, and I quote, to "go get your hole". Women do not have it as bad as they think in this department

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Because it's assumed that my parents were desperately hoping for a son but "ended up" with four daughters. Sure what good are daughters to a farmer?

Who is assuming these things? Has your mother or father actually ever meaningfully said this to you? Are you a psychic? Can you read people's mind? Otherwise you are assuming what other people think.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Because on a street at night, I'm considered an easy target.

And half as likely to get attacked. Most random violent crime is committed against men. Just putting it out there

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Because if I am attacked, I'll be asked what I was wearing. I'll be asked about my sexual history. I'll be asked if I fought back.

I'll agree with the first and second point. What you are wearing and who or how many people you have slept with should have absolutely no bearing on the fact you were raped. However, rape is usually a crime not seen. So, unless you tried to fight back it is very hard to get a conviction as it's your word against theirs. I know that sounds like a horrible thing but that's the way the law works.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

I could literally write a book. If all that sounds trite to you, come back to me when you've spent 28 years living with it. Every. Damn. Day.

I have spent 22 years being a man. And trust me, it is no less easy. I could tell you a **** load of stories about how hard it was for me growing up as a man in modern Ireland. This is not true feminism, some of these are social problems that affect us all, some are gender roles and some are pure nonsense

iwantmydinner wrote: »

And that's all before we get to the position of women in countries far away from safe little Ireland. Anyone who still thinks feminism is no longer necessary...

I absolutely love this argument! It's a clear "I can't win on my own convictions and experience so let's use other countries! Yay" history has shown that, in most cases, trying to change things as an outside force usually entrenches those values and ideas. What we can do is help those on the inside fighting for their rights. We cannot force change from the outside, it has to occur from the people of the country they are in and it has to be organic and natural. Western feminists can't do much to change things in places like Saudi Arabia and 3rd world countries.

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Of course, I have to add in here the usual "I'm not a man hater" clause. I support the removal of the bias towards the mother in family law cases. As for prison, I think the whole prison system needs review - it's not working for men or women. The issue of suicide in young men needs urgent appraisal and addressing. Being a feminist doesn't mean I don't care about these things.

Awesome great to hear!

iwantmydinner

py2006 wrote: »

I could reply to this with some 'whataboutary' but I won't. Ok, I will a bit...

A lot of this works both ways, which feminism doesn't seem to recognise.

There are elements of the law that are extremely sexist and discriminatory towards men. There is (and has been) expectancy on me in the work place because of my gender (including putting up with sexist comments, being asked to move things/lift things and comments made about my jeans which were a little fitted in a certain area at the time).

I am more likely to be attacked violently as a man walking down the street at night alone and I have also been groped in a nightclub on a couple of occasions and I rarely went to them. I am sure if I went more frequently and I was a bit better looking it would have happened a lot more. I have also been in circumstances were a strange woman placed her hand on mine on a bus, I have had an older female colleague wrap her arms around me inappropriately and I was extremely uncomfortable with it at the time. Yet if I reported any of that I would be laughed at, not believed or told to man up or grow a pair etc.

So my point to you is that feminism largely ignores all that and makes that dramatic assumption that only women are victims and in some instances gets quite offended at the suggestion that men can be victims.

Please don't take that as a dismissal of your experiences.

Look, being honest, and not wishing to be argumentative, but it does feel dismissive.

All I've done is recount my personal, lived experience, and pointed to that as my reason for being a feminist. I really don't see how you (or anyone else) can take that as somehow meaning I think men don't face sexism, or that men aren't victimised. And every other feminist I know is on the same wavelength as me on this.

iwantmydinner

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

Unlike Py who didn't attack your whataboutary, I will. And let me pre-empt you thinking I hate feminists because I am going to agree with you on certain things.

That should be end of the discussion right here IMHO. You have had every opportunity a man has had in a system that favours women. You have equal rights in every single department (by both law and in general). So, if that's what the "original" feminists were fighting for, surely that's the end of the movement? But no, and this proves the point that feminism is an organisation to get women an improved status in society. Also, the phrase "nothing has been handed to me" I don't think you'll find many people who haven't had to work extremely hard for what they have.


Whilst I think you are greatly over-exaggerating the point here I agree with you. Women should have bodily autonomy.


Erm I think this applies to both sexes. Also, I don't think that comment is entirely out of place either. Most people want to find someone they can share their life with. People saying you'll meet a man in your new place of work is not a condescending comment on where and what you do, rather a hope that someone comes into your life to make you happier than you already are-and if that's not what you want that's perfectly cool too. If you don't like people saying it ask them to stop. Simples


Right, so because some assh*les asked you to make tea, all men expect the same thing? I hate when people take massive leaps of assumption. Also, why didn't you tell them to go make their own f*cking tea? Seems like a perfectly rational thing to do!


Yes, because this never happens men. Just like men don't get raped or sexually abused by women. Also, if a lad starts causing hassle with you in a nightclub you can go tell a bouncer. If a girl is doing it to guy and he tells the bouncer, the bouncer will either laugh in his face or tell him, and I quote, to "go get your hole". Women do not have it as bad as they think in this department


Who is assuming these things? Has your mother or father actually ever meaningfully said this to you? Are you a psychic? Can you read people's mind? Otherwise you are assuming what other people think.

And half as likely to get attacked. Most random violent crime is committed against men. Just putting it out there


I'll agree with the first and second point. What you are wearing and who or how many people you have slept with should have absolutely no bearing on the fact you were raped. However, rape is usually a crime not seen. So, unless you tried to fight back it is very hard to get a conviction as it's your word against theirs. I know that sounds like a horrible thing but that's the way the law works.


I have spent 22 years being a man. And trust me, it is no less easy. I could tell you a **** load of stories about how hard it was for me growing up as a man in modern Ireland. This is not true feminism, some of these are social problems that affect us all, some are gender roles and some are pure nonsense


I absolutely love this argument! It's a clear "I can't win on my own convictions and experience so let's use other countries! Yay" history has shown that, in most cases, trying to change things as an outside force usually entrenches those values and ideas. What we can do is help those on the inside fighting for their rights. We cannot force change from the outside, it has to occur from the people of the country they are in and it has to be organic and natural. Western feminists can't do much to change things in places like Saudi Arabia and 3rd world countries.


Awesome great to hear!

My feminism is not based on attacking your belief system or on a dismissal or hatred of men. I really don't see why you would choose to pick apart my lived experience, line by line... What do you achieve by doing that?

iwantmydinner

tritium wrote: »

If I was being pedantic I might respond with: when all those allegations of whataboutery are flying about here, do any of the feminists on here actually in any meaningful sense give a flying fcuk about the real issues being raised by men here?

If I was being pedantic....

But to answer your question. I found the experiences to be a mixed bag based on the small number I've seen (not really a tweeter). I don't doubt that women experience sexism. However the #yesallwomen hash tag has become a mix of genuine heartbreaking experiences and rants some of which are utterly misandrist or pure victim mentality (interspersed with some men getting hot under the colar about it all).

I do however think that a campaign like that fortifies a victim mentality whereby anything can be construed as sexism, regardless of whether that's the intent ("... because my insurance covered payment for viagra and not for my birth control pills." Seriously? Change your fcuking insurer! But assuming its because theyre sexist....) I'd argue that the most proactive way to deal with sexism (whether its towards a man or a woman) is to confront it (I know that's not always possible).

So a question back at you- do you think its a legitimate tactic to hijack the #notallmen? Do you see what the purpose if that is or why men would feel the need to be part of that?

I haven't engaged in any whataboutery, whatsoever. I simply addressed the OP. I recounted my experiences, and answered the question. ETA: and to answer your first question - I certainly do. I even said so in my post...

I'm unsure about your final point. It's something I've been mulling for the last few days.

mrkiscool2

iwantmydinner wrote: »

My feminism is not based on attacking your belief system or on a dismissal or hatred of men. I really don't see why you would choose to pick apart my lived experience, line by line... What do you achieve by doing that?

I'm generally saying that assh*oles exist and the best way to stop more assh*oles sprouting up is by re-defining gender roles. The gender we need to work on most in this regard is males stop them being strong, macho guys! That's half your problems solved right there. I fail to see how that falls under feminism. That's my point. I don't mean to demean anything you felt, I just feel a lot of it is in your own head and on assumptions you make rather than actual fact.

And that's not necessarily your fault, it's the fault of feminists for playing the "victim" card far too often

mrkiscool2

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

The gender we need to work on most in this regard is males stop them being strong, macho guys!

wtf? I mean aside from sheer wtf, you go on about how it's not all men and leave the poor men alone and then suddenly it's stop men being strong? What's wrong with men being strong?

iwantmydinner

mrkiscool2 wrote: »

I'm generally saying that assh*oles exist and the best way to stop more assh*oles sprouting up is by re-defining gender roles. The gender we need to work on most in this regard is males stop them being strong, macho guys! That's half your problems solved right there. I fail to see how that falls under feminism. That's my point. I don't mean to demean anything you felt, I just feel a lot of it is in your own head and on assumptions you make rather than actual fact.

And that's not necessarily your fault, it's the fault of feminists for playing the "victim" card far too often

What?? We need to somehow weed out strong men? Did you mean to say that?

PS your last two sentences - an absolute masterclass in condescension.

py2006

iwantmydinner wrote: »

All I've done is recount my personal, lived experience, and pointed to that as my reason for being a feminist. I really don't see how you (or anyone else) can take that as somehow meaning I think men don't face sexism, or that men aren't victimised. And every other feminist I know is on the same wavelength as me on this.

Not you, feminism. That is why I don't feel comfortable with something that appears happy to disregard the plight of others and only focus on a percentage of victims.

I am sure there are those who see themselves as feminists and don't disregard others. Buy my experience is they either dismiss or are willing to concede that a small percentage of victims may be men.

tritium

iwantmydinner wrote: »

I haven't engaged in any whataboutery, whatsoever. I simply addressed the OP. I recounted my experiences, and answered the question.

I'm unsure about your final point. It's something I've been mulling for the last few days.

Probably should have been clearer with my first point. Its not a dig at you, more a comment that if feminists believe there's value to this campaign then there must be scope for value in what they call whataboutery to highlight genuine men's issues

Reekwind

So, according to some male posters here, sexism in the West is a thing of the past? Great stuff.

donfers wrote: »

1. Now that laws and regulations are in place to deal with gender discrimination there is an increasing focus by some feminist campaigners on "thought crime" - whenever any kind of political vehicke starts venturing into that territory I start thinking they've got too much time and power on their hands and should be investing it elsewhere (like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan etc. where women are stoned publically for affairs - surely that's a more pressing concern than if a guy didn't avert his gaze from your cleavage quickly enough or if he used the word "bossy" or "darling")

I'm fairly sure that feminism isn't a scarce resource that must be carefully rationed out globally. It is possible to object to both objectification and the stoning of women to death at the same; indeed criticisms of both stem from the same core ideal of equality. I don't see the sense in not worrying about relatively minor or insidious examples of sexism just because another country is even more backwards.

(And, really, that logic applies to almost everything. Why were people concerned about X's share of the vote last week? Shouldn't you be off fighting for democracy in China?)

iwantmydinner

iwantmydinner wrote: »

What?? We need to somehow weed out strong men? Did you mean to say that?

PS your last two sentences - an absolute masterclass in condescension.

It's not your fault. You're just a silly easily swayed woman

iwantmydinner

py2006 wrote: »

Not you, feminism. That is why I don't feel comfortable with something that appears happy to disregard the plight of others and only focus on a percentage of victims.

I am sure there are those who see themselves as feminists and don't disregard others. Buy my experience is they either dismiss or are willing to concede that a small percentage of victims may be men.

Look, there are plenty of movements and organisations that concern themselves with only with only a small percentage of people (or as you call them, victims). Does that mean they're disregarding the plight of others?

Sleepy

Tbh, iwantmydinner, most of your points deserved to be dismissed in a conversation about gender equality. While mrkiscool2's last post is, frankly, baffling, he was correct in his pulling you up on your points as they either weren't factually correct, were societal issues that effect both genders or were just cases of you claiming victim status.

In the western world, feminism has achieved the goal of ensuring women have the same legal rights and protections as men. In fact, in some areas, it's over-shot it's originally stated goals and achieved superior legal status.

Whether it's as a result of an ingrained group think that still holds women as victims and men as their oppressors, the case of an industry attempting to keep perpetuating itself after it's no longer relevant or the plain and simple misandry of the radfems: instead of celebrating the victory of feminism and enjoying the freedoms their mothers and grandmothers have won for them, or moving on to other matters, the feminist movement would appear to be tearing itself apart into a myriad of different factions that seem to, at best, lobby on issues that effect women proportionally more than men e.g. abortion debate that would probably be best addressed as a gender neutral topic or at their worst demand the subjugation of men and to enshrine superior legal protections/societal status and lower legal penalties for women based purely on their gender.

py2006

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Look, there are plenty of movements and organisations that concern themselves with only with only a small percentage of people (or as you call them, victims). Does that mean they're disregarding the plight of others?

I was using the term victim in terms of being a victim of discrimination and abuse. Well for example here in Ireland, if there is a campaign or a awareness campaign for domestic violence who you do think they are targeting?

Not only are they ignoring male victims (which I believe if researched thoroughly would reveal a far higher stat that what is currently portrayed) they are also ignoring gay and lesbian couples where domestic violence occurs.

Reekwind

Reekwind wrote: »

So, according to some male posters here, sexism in the West is a thing of the past? Great stuff.

According to some male posters we're also not allowed to care about the plight of many women suffering sexism in other countries either, because "it happens to men too and not enough fuss is made about them". So I think this western thing is a red herring tbh.
In tradition of this thread, maybe I should assume that because some posters feel that way, I should accuse every male poster of feeling that way repeatedly

iwantmydinner

Sleepy wrote: »

Tbh, iwantmydinner, most of your points deserved to be dismissed in a conversation about gender equality. While mrkiscool2's last post is, frankly, baffling, he was correct in his pulling you up on your points as they either weren't factually correct, were societal issues that effect both genders or were just cases of you claiming victim status.

In the western world, feminism has achieved the goal of ensuring women have the same legal rights and protections as men. In fact, in some areas, it's over-shot it's originally stated goals and achieved superior legal status.

Whether it's as a result of an ingrained group think that still holds women as victims and men as their oppressors, the case of an industry attempting to keep perpetuating itself after it's no longer relevant or the plain and simple misandry of the radfems: instead of celebrating the victory of feminism and enjoying the freedoms their mothers and grandmothers have won for them, or moving on to other matters, the feminist movement would appear to be tearing itself apart into a myriad of different factions that seem to, at best, lobby on issues that effect women proportionally more than men e.g. abortion debate that would probably be best addressed as a gender neutral topic or at their worst demand the subjugation of men and to enshrine superior legal protections/societal status and lower legal penalties for women based purely on their gender.

Wow. It's actually breathtaking how easily you can dismiss another person's life experiences and belief system.

Can you point to my factually incorrect statements?

iwantmydinner

py2006 wrote: »

I was using the term victim in terms of being a victim of discrimination and abuse. Well for example here in Ireland, if there is a campaign or a awareness campaign for domestic violence who you do think they are targeting?

Not only are they ignoring male victims (which I believe if researched thoroughly would reveal a far higher stat that what is currently portrayed) they are also ignoring gay and lesbian couples where domestic violence occurs.

Where did I say I condoned the narrow focus of domestic violence campaigns? I specifically said in my first post that I also care about issues concerning men.

Reekwind

Sleepy wrote: »

In the western world, feminism has achieved the goal of ensuring women have the same legal rights and protections as men. In fact, in some areas, it's over-shot it's originally stated goals and achieved superior legal status.

As an obvious expert on feminist theory, can you point me to any works that define the struggle for equality in strictly legal terms? That is, the idea that passing of laws is the be-all and end-all of feminism. (As opposed to, say, being merely a means to an end.)

Whether it's as a result of an ingrained group think that still holds women as victims and men as their oppressors, the case of an industry attempting to keep perpetuating itself after it's no longer relevant or the plain and simple misandry of the radfems

Honestly, I think it's quite disgusting (intellectually, if nothing else) that when a woman lays out why she feels that she is still affected by sexism and why she sees a continuing need for a feminist movement, we have a bunch of male posters dismissing her concerns, insisting that sexism is a thing of the past and blaming the continued existence of feminism on self-interest or misandry.

It's condescending in the extreme and only shows lends substance to iwantmydinner's position.

py2006

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Where did I say I condoned the narrow focus of domestic violence campaigns? I specifically said in my first post that I also care about issues concerning men.

You didn't. I am just highlighting were feminism (in general) and these campaigns don't.

py2006

Reekwind wrote: »

Honestly, I think it's quite disgusting (intellectually, if nothing else) that when a woman lays out why she feels that she is still affected by sexism and why she sees a continuing need for a feminist movement, we have a bunch of male posters dismissing her concerns, insisting that sexism is a thing of the past.

Whoa, now hold on a second there.

mrkiscool2

Reekwind wrote: »

So, according to some male posters here, sexism in the West is a thing of the past? Great stuff.

Oh of course not. Because only women can be treated with sexism, just like only women can be raped and absued by a partner :rolleyes:

I didn't mean figuratively strong. I meant they don't have to keep all their emotions bottled up inside and act the lad with all their mates and be a general assh*ole to women. If we thought them it's perfectly ok to let your feelings out, that attacking anyone (both men and women) is not ok and that if anyone attacks you that's not ok and you should talk about it with someone. That's what I meant. That's how you solve most of the problems posters are on here are claiming "they need feminism" for. Sometimes I am not as articulate with my posts as I would like.

jackofalltrades

iwantmydinner wrote: »

My feminism is not based on attacking your belief system or on a dismissal or hatred of men. I really don't see why you would choose to pick apart my lived experience, line by line... What do you achieve by doing that?

Agreed, I think it's unnecessary and completely insensitive.

Sleepy wrote:

Tbh, iwantmydinner, most of your points deserved to be dismissed in a conversation about gender equality.

The threads title is "Are you a feminst?".
iwantmydinner gave an honest, personal account of what she thinks feminism is and why she is a feminist.
I don't think her points deserve to be dismissed, and I didn't see anything factual incorrect in her post.

I feel there's a way of making a point, but going through someone's personal experiences line by line isn't it.

mrkiscool2

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Wow. It's actually breathtaking how easily you can dismiss another person's life experiences and belief system.

Can you point to my factually incorrect statements?

Right, fine. Should I start up a men's right group because my own mother viewed me as inferior for being a man? Because that's one of my many experiences I have had as many that could make me want to just campaign for men's rights! But no, I don't. I see it as a problem with how our education system teaches our kids to act, how our parents teach our kids to act. Your personal experiences are just that, your experiences. I found your post was making a lot of assumptions that took huge leaps but again I wasn't there, I can't tell.

I'm not demeaning your experiences in anyway. My point is that feminism is not the solution to the problem. Neither is egaltarianism. It's redefining gender roles and better educating the next generation.

mrkiscool2

bluewolf wrote: »

According to some male posters we're also not allowed to care about the plight of many women suffering sexism in other countries either, because "it happens to men too and not enough fuss is made about them". So I think this western thing is a red herring tbh.
In tradition of this thread, maybe I should assume that because some posters feel that way, I should accuse every male poster of feeling that way repeatedly

Hardly. The point is all we can do is support them, we can't get actively involved. I explained already that any outside force on another peoples current way of life (however wrong it may be) entrenches those beliefs.

smoking_kills

iwantmydinner wrote: »

Wow. It's actually breathtaking how easily you can dismiss another person's life experiences and belief system.

Like pro choicer's/pro lifer's do, every day and twice on Sundays.

mrkiscool2

jackofalltrades wrote: »

Agreed, I think it's unnecessary and completely insensitive.
The threads title is "Are you a feminst?".
iwantmydinner gave an honest, personal account of what she thinks feminism is and why she is a feminist.
I don't think her points deserve to be dismissed, and I didn't see anything factual incorrect in her post.

I feel there's a way of making a point, but going through someone's personal experiences line by line isn't it.

Right, so if I said something like "Oh, I need masculanism (or whatever the male equivalent of feminism is) because people assume I can change a tyre" or "because whenever I go on a night out I'm expected to help my male friends get the ride" would that stand? Because that's in the same vain of what she was saying! I wasn't attacking her experiences, I was showing how maybe, and this is a crazy notion here, none of them have anything to do with feminism