If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Feminist fury
**helen**
Deactivated Posts: 9,235 Supreme Poster
Gemma has written a rant about feminist stereotypes, tell us what you think 
0
Comments
Back to Gemma:
:yes:
I think also many feminists fall into the trap of being this thing, I can't remember the word but it came up ages ago. Basically when you are fighting from a position of an underdog it is natural to jump to extremes. So sometimes there is anti-male sentiment bundled up with the good, constructive stuff. Sometimes, that is.
I would describe myself as a feminist as far as being interested in sexual equality goes, but not exclusively for women. Through education all my teachers were women, and some had strong views about men which looking back were unfair. I've been told I'm not suitable for jobs because it's a women's position (that's sexism two ways I guess though - was a sandwich maker in a deli! I might not have got it anyway, but saying it was a women's position made me wonder). And of course, one of my (male) lecturers went on a rant about how women are downtrodden (fair point) even though they're more intelligent (ignoring that there may be socialogical reasons to that - if anyone had some of the teachers I had for example they may well end up doing worse at school).
I agree completely people need to start afresh on what the definition of feminism is. I think it's a loaded term because of the 'fem' bit - people automatically assume it's going to have a pro-female bias. I think maybe a more neutral term for someone who is interested in sexual equality regardless of gender. (I am aware that 99.9% of feminists adhere to this anyway, it's just the terminology that seems misleading)
My £0.02.
Edit: was briggi and the word was Polemicist (in reference to Germaine Greer)
Seriously good rant though. I agree with quite a bit of it. There are alot of feminist who give these streyotypes ground - but a huge number who don't, simply because due to these stereotypes people don't think of a "feminist" as a normal person - they expect man hating furious wrath and condemnation.
Which isn't REALLY feminism, just an extreme branch.
I have to avoid talking about feminism to most people because they get angry at me. My main area of focus at uni is women and I have been marked down for this (I believe).
Feminism, women in literature, women in business, notable women in history... Women anywhere interest me because in the past women have had it much harder and it has took that extra slog to get along. Gender is fascinating and it is tragic that we live in a society where there is a stigma for believing that women and men are equal and for questioning power dynamics... You can do it with race, why not with gender?
Stereotypes are created and maintained not only by the media, but through culture and education which has in the past and today still is (fortunately to a lesser extent) controlled by men, many of who have an interest in maintaining hegemony.
I don't think its necessarily the amount of people, more that sometimes those who are shouting the loudest get heard more and focussed on by the media therefore distorting people's perceptions.
Feminism is HUGE.
I don't understand how social determinism is man hating?
I'll come back to this one shortly...
I'm afraid I have to disagree on this one. A lot of feminist writing has criticised 'liberal feminism' on the idea of equality, saying that often the concept is dictated from an entirely androcentric viewpoint. I am yet to read any book or polemic that has discussed 'sameness', unless you mean from the perspective of gender roles and not biology?
Of course, there are a couple of rare cases like Firestone (I think?) who are to the 'feminist world' what 'extremists' are to the 'Muslim world'. If you want a laugh, read Solanas. lol!
Although, I see no harm in exploring ways in how women and men are the same. Fitness related, but there was an interesting piece on how men and women are taught and told to do push ups. As the author says, there are physiological differences in terms of musculature (specifically the amount), but with practice and time, there's no reason why a woman can't knock out a good set.
Voila
Recently, I was told by someone that I don't 'need to lift like a man'
- Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.
I find it hard to believe that a decent human wouldn't be a feminist; If a feminist is someone who espouses feminism, then i find it hard to understand how a cogent argument could be formed to the contrary.I think in a past thread someone mentioned (it may have been ShyBoy, but i can't be certain) that feminism should be a default position - a sentiment i wholeheartedly agree with. It seems, to me at least, that criticism of feminism based on anything other than the striving for equality is likely to be aimed a personal interpretation, rather than the idea itself.
For that definition to be correct, 'belief in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes' would have to be the lowest common demoninator among feminists. It clearly isn't, taking into account the views of feminists such as Valerie Solanas, Mary Daly, Andrea Dworkin, Marilyn French, Robyn Morgan, Ti-Grace Atkinson (I could go on).
And before anyone says I'm referring to the extreme wing of feminism, most if not all of the above (with the exception of Solanas) are well respected within the feminist movement and some also within academia, politics and the legal world.
So...feminism can't be defined as belief in social, political and economic equality of the sexes, given that such a belief is not the lowest common demoninator. A more fitting definition of feminism would be: a movement which seeks to increase female power.
Socialist feminism
Anarcho feminism
Black feminism
Muslim feminism
Radical feminism
Liberal feminism
Lesbian feminism
Eco feminism
And so the list goes on.....
So it really depends on who you read. A lot of writers can be respected in a field, but that does not mean that they are representitive of the entire discipline.
And I think that globally, heck even in the UK... Female power should be increased until it is equal with men. Doesn't any body else agree?
ETA: if you want an idea on how all feminists don't believe the same thing, look at the pro vs anti porn divide.
I haven't said anything to the contrary.
Again, I haven't claimed those feminists are representative of feminism generally. What I have claimed is, given the views of those individuals mentioned, belief in the social, political and economic equality of women is not the lowest common demoninator amongst feminist and thus cannot be an accurate definition.
Surely you would agree for a movement to be defined as a group of people who believe in x, x would have to be the lowest common dominator?
I'm not sure i quite follow. I may just be being a bit dense.
I wouldn't call espousing equality of the sexes as the 'lowest common denominator' - that is to say the least sophisticated of the feminist ideals - it simply is the fundamental definition, and i'd suggest the eventual aim, of feminism; how you get to that point is the methodology you employ: the increasing of female power and influence until it is in line with that of the male.
As I just posted: to define feminism or any other movement as a group that believes in x, everyone in that group would have to believe in x. Right? Well, not all feminists believe in equality: some hate men and think women should rule the world and reduce the male population to a 'managable level'. So feminism cannot be described as a movement that believes in political, economic and social equality when plenty of examples can be given of people within the movement who want supremacy, not equality. But that's not to say other feminists merely want what they perceive as equality: it is to say that another definition - a movement with the aim of furthering female power - is required to cover both perspectives.
Surely the "feminists" in question aren't feminists, they a subscribe to something else - misandry perhaps. Someone calling themselves a Christian who proclaimed that they didn't believe that Christ was the saviour, wouldn't require the definition of Christian to change, but their own label.
Not that it changes much, just that I believe there is a lot of ambiguity about and that the popular definition of feminism doesn't seem quite... logical. But then again neither does the popular definition of the word homophobic, you would assume it means scared of homosexuals, but is actually taken and accepted to mean hates homosexuals.
With so many people not able to agree on what the word even means (and I'm sure this is the same even within the different strands of feminism as Namaste listed), it's no doubt that some people interpret it wrongly and maybe think people who call themselves feminists mean something other than they actually mean... if that makes sense?
Well of course it's about raising the rights of women, but with the aim of equality between the sexes. If the current situation (or situation at the start of the feminist movement) was that men had fewer rights than women, the feminism would seek to raise the rights of men instead (and would probably have a different name).
I don't feel comfortable giving myself a label that others use for themselves whilst they spout man hating crap.
The very word is gender charged itself, wouldn't 'equalist' be better?
If I call msylef that, then I can say I'm against descrimination based on gender as well as race, age, religion etc.
Just the way I look at it.
I don't disagree with you at all, that's kind of my point, except that I'm not sure that feminism = equality movement. Like I said, I don't think they're exclusive and for the most part people subscribe to both, but you could believe in equality and believe that women should not have more rights, rather men were stripped of theirs (how that would work, I don't know). Or, you could believe women should be empowered more (feminist) but not necessarily to the same degree as men, maybe less or maybe more.
So that's why I was saying (it may have got lost in my ramble) that the definition of feminism is ambiguous at best because most people take it to mean something which it doesn't exactly, just coincides with.
There's many words which strictly mean one thing, but are interpreted by a lot (most?) people as meaning something else:
- nationalist
- homophobic
- socialist
etc.
For the most part, I guess it doesn't matter. Language is how people use language. But then if someone labels themselves a feminist, and gets attacked for being a raving man hater, it's probably more to do with confusion over what feminism means which I don't think is completely clear, and what the ideals of feminism are. Certainly some of the most outspoken feminists are relatively militant and make sexist remarks about men, and jo public is probably going to make their mind up based on those who shout loudest.
I think feminism is a good thing, obviously, but has the word been used to encompass too many things now?
edit: apparently, masculism is alive and well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masculism
So, dictionary entries:
Feminism - advocate of women's rights
Masculism - advocate of men's rights
... Everythingism - advocate of everyone's rights?
Aha, found it - Equalitarianism
http://healingthesplit.tribe.net/thread/750cdf86-8b53-4ac7-8118-98b6c22b9e16
Has some good definitions, haven't read the rest but the definitions are logical
That's a bad analogy. The feminists in questions are widely accepted and even revered within the feminist movement - if someone doesn't believe Christ was the son of God, the Christian community would hardly accept them as one of their own.
The whole "political, social and economic equality" mantra has been formulated so that people think in response "oh well, I can't disagree with that so I must be a feminist".
Personally, I generally believe in men and women having the same opportunities - something which most people would agree with, and something we already have today. But that does not entail political, economic and social equality - something only an authoritarian state could achieve. And authoritarianism is the name of the game when it comes to gender feminism, which is the dominant strand of feminism today.
If you read the link I posted in the post above (its not very long) its someone who makes a criticism of feminism and masculism in a very similar way, saying that both whether intentionally or not breed misandry / misogyny respectively.
Although I'm not sure men and women have the same opportunities, there are still a lot of discrepencies. But the 'first wave' feminism movement in the UK at least has given women the right to vote and so on. At least from what I've read on wikipedia, (not the best source but it's an interesting read) some second wave feminism incorporates some form of misandry into the spiel. This is misinterpreted as representing all of the feminist movement.
To use an analogy, look at socialism. Radical socialists like marx argue that the way the capitalist structure works, those who are in power will retain power for themselves and the working class will always always end up worse off. The way to stop this is to redesign the system - some proponents believe this to mean some kind of violent revolution.
Although violence towards men has been very rarely advocated, radical feminists (and forgive me if I'm getting it completely wrong) do sometimes harbor some animosity towards men for 'conserving power' and because the structure of society is built so that women will always come second place. This animosity in many cases leads to misandry, fear and resentment of men. How many of us working class people resent rich people for a similar reason?
However, because of (the sometimes very vocal) advocates of this kind of 'men must be brought down before we can be equal' ideology, it has led to misrepresentation of what feminism actually means.
Anyway, this is all just taken from my reading last night, the scariest of which was the SCUM manifesto :nervous: so I'm not the most educated person on the subject! It's fascinating tho