Interest - Feminism

Originally created by !!  Ratio
6 years ago.

on 1 Root

11 Comments

Heiveldboy
1

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Could anyone here explain to me why they 'like' feminism?
Tama Yoshi
4

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Tama Yoshi 23 Canada PhlegmaticCholeric INTJ 513 472C
In general terms, feminism is about gender equality, not about female superiority. Gender equality I consider to be a very positive thing. That's the essential of it for me.

But you probably already know that. I recall you complained about positive discrimination (the act of giving an ADVANTAGE to a certain group because they were irredeemably at a disadvantage). This is very debatable, and you can arguably be a feminist while not positively discriminating positively women.

Frankly, I don't really mind at all that such a thing as positive discrimination exists, and consider it a good thing. I don't mind that female cops exist, even though they are statistically less strong.

I believe in equal chances over equal opportunities in that sense...

But considering my definition (simple equality of genders), I'd be quite shocked if anyone was earnestly against feminism...
Heiveldboy
1

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Then what to you is the difference between feminism and humanism and egalitarianism?
Tama Yoshi
1

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Tama Yoshi 23 Canada PhlegmaticCholeric INTJ 513 472C
Well, to a degree, I'm not comfortable comparing them because I'm not exactly sure about their specific characteristics, but I guess they're kind of the same >_>

A quick search on wiki tells me that feminism actually aims for equal opportunity of woman. ... Hrm... Why do I always get my political lexicon mixed up...

It seems that feminism is, at heart, an ideology that fights for women's rights. That can't be wrong.
Heiveldboy
3

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
And THAT is exactly the problem I have with feminism.
Feminism is indeed an ideology that has equality as the outcome, but their methods, focusing only on the issues of women, is what bothers me.
In this day and age we don't need one-gender ideologies. We don't need feminism and we don't need the MRM. We need a movement that is bent on focusing on the issues of HUMANS, not MEN and not WOMEN. Both genders have their share of problems, and to me all of those problems need to be fixed.
It's for that reason that I consider myself to be a (secular) humanist and an egalitarianist.
Tama Yoshi
1

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Tama Yoshi 23 Canada PhlegmaticCholeric INTJ 513 472C
Well, I respect that. Although you're essentially just saying that what's wrong with feminism is the perspective it has. I think sexism still exists in this world, so I guess focusing on sexism isn't that wrong at all. Although, it certainly would be good if there were anti-racism groups and what not, but I don't see absolute equality manifestations have as much impact as say, the pride parade.

If it's too broad, it won't make as big a point.
Heiveldboy
1

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Sexism does indeed exist, but it exists against both genders. It's fine to focus on sexism to some extent, but all of your attention at the cost of any focus on the other gender? That's where I say no.
Well, the pessimist in me does say that equality is a fairy tale that'll never exist because of the people in charge (rich assholes), but it's a nice illusion to fight for, eh?

We don't know about that. Imagine what the feminists and MRA's could do if they started working together rather than fighting one another.
Thisisnotanalt
4

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Thisisnotanalt 21 United States MelancholicSanguine INFP 471 87C
Sexism as it's sociologically defined refers to prejudice distributed, propagated, enabled, etc. by/through societal and institutional power. In that sense, sexism against men does not exist according to feminist discourse, which is based around analysis, deconstruction, etc. of society in the context of the existence of a patriarchy. From a feminist perspective, egalitarianism is inadequate and essentially misses the point of how society is structured--it's all fine and dandy to declare that everyone is equal, but in feminist discourse women are said to face institutionalized societal oppression which warrants attention and dismantling that the comparatively disparate injustices visited upon men do not require. Feminism (generally) does not at all deny that there are unjust discriminations against men, but the discrimination against women is argued/analyzed to exist in the form of a fairly monolithic hierarchal power structure which functions by putting men in a position of societal power over women.

Furthermore, the feminist movement is primarily concerned with women because the feminist movement is made up of women; feminist discourse relies on academic analysis and praxisy protest and action, yes, but all of that is made possible by personal experience and background in experiencing that oppression in the first place. Do I personally think that societal phenomena involving men deserve more time, analysis, attention, activism, etc.? Hell yeah I do! But for me to look at the feminist movement and say "hey, where's your in-depth analysis of my experiences and my way of life and my challenges" is unreasonable because, well, those issues are not shared between us. I think that the lack of discourse surrounding the issues men face related to sex is the fault of men for not getting off their asses and doing analysis that's not rooted in hate-crime fury (the MRAs).

...And by the way, the reason the feminist movement fights the MRAs is because in general, the men's rights movement is quasi-terroristic and spends most of its time, you know, advocating that jury nullification be used to blanket-acquit all men accused of rape and things like that. Not to mention that once you get outside of all the fedora-waving hormonal teens on reddit, a sizable amount of the MRA movement is focused around analyzing society in the context of a matriarchy with a goal of unadulterated male supremacy, which is pretty much inherently incompatible with feminism or egalitarianism.

As far as your rich assholes statement goes, change it to "rich white cishet male assholes" and you've essentially nailed down what feminist, anti-racist, trans*-rights, etc. activism is saying. :P What I'd recommend doing is just reading up more on feminism in academia and what its goals and justifications and analyses and such are; the feminist movement relies a lot on jargon and common knowledge which--surprise surprise--is pretty intuitive and instantly clear to women, but tends to be lost on men. If there were more discourse about men's issues out there, the same would be true of that movement in relation to women.
Heiveldboy
3

Notice: Undefined index: FID in /home4/yalort/public_html/charcoal/code/common.php on line 11
Yeah, sorry dude, but I can't accept that premise. I refuse to believe that men cannot be disadvantaged (or that this disadvantage should not be taken seriously) and that women are the sole victims of our society, especially after all the studies I have been presented with.
While I do agree to some extent that women face institutionazed social PRESSURE, I also see the pressure men get in our society.

From what I gather the feminists movement also has a large amount of male feminists, the so-called 'mangina's'. Are you yourself not male?
I would dare to disagree with the premise that feminist discourse relies on academic analysis; I've seen some of studies presented to me by feminists and I can either see the confirmation bias or plain faults within them. You are free to present studies of any variety to me if you want to correct this statement. I'll be eager to take a look at it.
... Dude, you are filled with hatred for the MRM. Believe me when I say I've talked to a couple of MRA's and read the studies they presented to me (scientific studies, not studies they themselves conducted).

Just as some MRA's are trying to fight the jurisdictional oppression of men when it comes to divorce settlements or just as some MRA's are trying to get the school system to adapt more to boys.
Just as some feminists are laughing about a dick being chopped off and just like some feminists advocate the notion of 'reducing the male population to 10% and castrate those 10%'.
I'm sure that the people you speak of are the radical MRA's (just like how the feminists have their rather large radical portion...), though I have heard of this 'nullification' you speak of. What they were saying (based on this action: ∞ YouTube ∞ is that women shouldn't cry rape when they had sex during a drunk state after they gave their consent.
The MRM is indeed incompatible with true egalitarianism, but so is feminism. Both are one-gender ideologies only interested in the gender they protect. As I said before, we don't need that, we need movements focused on human beings.

Well, I guess we'll have to add 'rich white cishet female assholes', because studies have repeatedly shown that women are attaining higher-end positions. This list was presented to me by a MRA: ∞ LINK ∞
This is a list with the most female dominated work fields, and you may noticed that a job like manager is already 35%. How much was that 50 years ago?
Also, here's an article that speaks of the most powerful women: ∞ LINK ∞
It seems that women are also a (small) part of the group you speak of.
Could you give me anything to read or point me in any directions? I don't live in America, so I can't just go to a university and ask for course material.