Feminism - an Egalitarian term?

01-08-2010 01:08AM

WindSock wrote: »

Why would they? Racist is a negative term. Feminist isn't (or shouldn't be)

yeah but it has been ... oh your not one of those feminists are you ? ( implying you are a man hating nit picking freak )

Dudess · 01-08-2010 01:09AM

Ollchailin wrote: »

God yeah, I agree completely- it actually does more harm than good for the image of women in general, and only ends up irritating men & rationally-thinking women rather than actually achieving anything. When feminists or even some from women's rights movements get on their soapbox sometimes, particularly when referring to women in the developed world, I just cringe. It's actually almost like they're telling women how to think or feel, which is actually a joke because surely that's the whole point of gender equality- that we don't need anyone to tell us how to think? That we've the ability to stand up for what we believe as individuals, regardless of our gender?

Or some feminists telling strippers they're being anti feminist... well no, not if they choose to be strippers.
I don't think support services for abuse (sexual and domestic) survivors should be gender specific either, but I suppose that's a complex issue...

vicecreamsundae · 01-08-2010 01:09AM

Ollchailin wrote: »

I suppose it's easy for us women in the developed world to look at feminism as a slightly old-fashioned way of thinking. I'd agree that it's better to have equality of the sexes, as opposed to trying to out-do each other. But if I was a woman living in a country where I was oppressed by men, it'd be hard for me not to want to try & get one over on them.

Having said that, there is the whole thing that men still on average earn more than women etc.- but then pregnancy has a lot to do with that, & women still seem to have the upper hand when it comes to gaining rights of access to a child- so there's just one example of inequality that still exists in a modern country.

I think people have to accept though, that it's ok that men and women are different- it doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing.

i agree with you that it's easy for people in developed countries to act like feminism is irrelvant, when globally it's crazy just how much inequality persists, but i feel i must point out that feminism is about equality, not 'getting one over on the men'. that's an inaccurate stereotype.

also, a lot of people talk about how men and women are different, as if that has anything to do with them being equal. everyone is different. men and women have FAR much more in common than we don't. people exaggerate the difference but genetically we are something like 99.6% similar [and no, i don't have the reference offhand, but it was in a biology book, not a 'feminist' book]. we're not different species, and we all deserve equal rights.
sorry for the mini rant i've just heard a lot lately about men and women needing 'different rights' because they're different, as opposed to equal rights, i mean you could have said "i think people have to accept that it's ok that white people and black people are different -it doesn't have to be a bad thing". think about the implications that has.

WindSock · 01-08-2010 01:11AM

Ernest Uptight Handlebar wrote: »

yeah but it has been ... oh your not one of those feminists are you ? ( implying you are a man hating nit picking freak )

I tell them I am and to go buy me a fking drink!

Sorry · 01-08-2010 01:13AM

The Agogo wrote: »

For instance, take the term "racist". This term/ideology refers to a person who believes that their own race is superior to all others. Hence, feminist denotes that females are aiming to be ordinate over men (the correct use of the term).

Doesn't really though.

Wiktionary:

Suffix

-ist
Added to words to form nouns denoting:
One who follows a principle or system of belief. Marxist , deist Note, these are related to -ism, e.g. Marxism, deism

A member of a profession or one interested in something. botanist psychiatrist, one who studies psychiatry

A person who uses something. violinist, one who plays a violin

A person who holds biased views. sexist, racist

Dudess · 01-08-2010 01:14AM

Mrmoe wrote: »

Feminism is a dirty word to use mainly because it has become corrupted by those who seek more than what they deserve.

Agreed, but at the same time, it's irking when some ascribe that to all feminists.

In this country the balance is not too bad but I think it has swung in favor of women these days. It will balance out eventually, all it needs is time.

In relation to some stuff, agreed, but when the whinges of "Men are second class citizens nowadays" start... god give me strength. Straight from the same school of thought as "The only true victim of discrimination is the white, middle-class, western, heterosexual male". Bless.

The Agogo · 01-08-2010 01:15AM

Sorry wrote: »

Doesn't really though.

Well number 4 on that list seems to verify it.

01-08-2010 01:18AM

The Agogo wrote: »

Well number 4 on that list seems to verify it.

lets get all bogged down in semantics now good idea

Sorry · 01-08-2010 01:20AM

The Agogo wrote: »

Well number 4 on that list seems to verify it.

No it doesn't. Number 1 explains the use of the -ist suffix with regard to the word feminist.

The Agogo · 01-08-2010 01:25AM

I've no problem with the principle of feminism (which is gender equality). But we are getting into semantics here. Feminism is just a redundant word is all I'm trying to say. Better to call it Gender Equality or egalitarianism (equality for all).

I'm actually sorry I brought this up at all. *goes to bed* I've got work in 5 hours.

tony1kenobi · 01-08-2010 01:26AM

Ernest Uptight Handlebar wrote: »

lets get all bogged down in semantics now good idea

I think rights is leftist.

My name is URL · 01-08-2010 01:28AM

How many self proclaimed and outspoken feminists give a crap about the injustices towards men in paternity suits, etc?

It works both ways.. it shouldn't be about one sex domineering the other, be it in a social context or a legal one.. There's militants in every aspect of life though.. those that feel a given right to claim the flag they should be trying to destroy.

Ollchailin · 01-08-2010 01:33AM

vicecreamsundae wrote: »

i mean you could have said "i think people have to accept that it's ok that white people and black people are different -it doesn't have to be a bad thing". think about the implications that has.

Ah yeah but I wouldn't say that, nor would most open-minded people (unless literally talking about skin colour only, in which case that's ok). Sure you could pick any two things and say they are different if that's the case. But I have absolutely no problem saying that men and women are different, and that it's ok that they are. Of course men and women should have equal basic human rights, but I also feel that there's often a "them versus us" outlook (from both sides), as opposed to achieving these rights because you are human as opposed to be either man or woman.

I think we're singing off the same hymn sheet really, but I like to embrace the fact that men and women are different, and sometimes allowances need to be made for this (without of course impinging on basic human rights).

Chuchoter · 01-08-2010 01:40AM

Feminism does not mean that women are superior to men, its about equality. I also don't think it has no place today. Women are still paid less, do not have ownership of their own bodies, the rape culture and we live in a culture where women are almost always objectified in the media. That is not to say men are do not have their own inequalities (unmarried fathers etc) but for the vast percentage of the time men don't have too much prejudice against them.

I think that feminism, as a concept, has been screwed over by several different groups to use for their own devices.

Sinfonia · 01-08-2010 01:57AM

crayolastereo wrote: »

Women...do not have ownership of their own bodies, the rape culture and we live in a culture where women are almost always objectified in the media.

Can you elaborate on these three points please?

Millicent · 01-08-2010 01:58AM

Dudess wrote: »

Or some feminists telling strippers they're being anti feminist... well no, not if they choose to be strippers.
I don't think support services for abuse (sexual and domestic) survivors should be gender specific either, but I suppose that's a complex issue...

Are you referring to Female Chauvinist Pigs? I found that book made a lot of good points, regarding sex and sexuality and highlighted how a lot of women were implicit in the subjugation of other women.

Chuchoter · 01-08-2010 02:02AM

Sinfonia wrote: »

Can you elaborate on these three points please?

No abortion. The rape culture is that as a woman I'm afraid to go out when its dark, my school ran self defense classes, there is a minuscule conviction rate for rapes and there is also a big group of people who think its a womans fault she got raped if she wore a low top. As for objectification, look at any perfume ad/music video/american apparel ad/so on and so forth. I mean when do you ever see an unattractive woman on TV? They are always dolled up to the nines, men can look however they want

Millicent · 01-08-2010 02:04AM

My name is URL wrote: »

How many self proclaimed and outspoken feminists give a crap about the injustices towards men in paternity suits, etc?

It works both ways.. it shouldn't be about one sex domineering the other, be it in a social scenario or a legal one. There's militants in every aspect of life though.. those that feel a given right to claim the flag they should be trying to destroy.

I do. I think it's shocking how men are treated in the legal system here especially regarding paternity and custody but we have had this debate on Boards before--feminists mobilised on a grand scale and there were legions of men who supported them. Men need to mobilise in the same way -en masse- and I will get out behind them and support them. (I know there are men who have before anyone points it out.)

ldxo15wus6fpgm · 01-08-2010 02:04AM

Can't we all just get along? :pac:

vicecreamsundae · 01-08-2010 02:11AM

Millicent wrote: »

I do. I think it's shocking how men are treated in the legal system here especially regarding paternity and custody but we have had this debate on Boards before--feminists mobilised on a grand scale and there were legions of men who supported them. Men need to mobilise in the same -way en masse- and I will get out behind them and support them. (I know there are men who have before anyone points it out.)

And I do too.

My Name is URL, when you say "how many feminists care about men's rights?" you're basically sticking to that stereotype that feminism is all about women, when it's about gender equality. as a feminist [and i speak for many feminists here], I care about both parents having more rights like paternal leave etc. equal rights benefit BOTH men and women -if men had more rights like paternal leave, [and not just legally had the right but it was socially accepted and supported] women wouldn't be so discriminated against in the workplace when it comes to promotions etc for example. it all ties together.

Millicent · 01-08-2010 02:18AM

vicecreamsundae wrote: »

And I do too.

My Name is URL, when you say "how many feminists care about men's rights?" you're basically sticking to that stereotype that feminism is all about women, when it's about gender equality. as a feminist [and i speak for many feminists here], I care about both parents having more rights like paternal leave etc. equal rights benefit BOTH men and women -if men had more rights like paternal leave, [and not just legally had the right but it was socially accepted and supported] women wouldn't be so discriminated against in the workplace when it comes to promotions etc for example. it all ties together.

And it could be argued that the situation is created by a patriarchal system which does not value men's place in the home. That or a hangover from a religious state that frowned upon children born out of wedlock and considered only the nuclear family to be a real one. Check out the Constitution for examples of both these prejudices.

Sinfonia · 01-08-2010 02:21AM

crayolastereo wrote: »

No abortion. The rape culture is that as a woman I'm afraid to go out when its dark, my school ran self defense classes, there is a minuscule conviction rate for rapes and there is also a big group of people who think its a womans fault she got raped if she wore a low top.

Thanks, wasn't sure what you meant. Agreed on both points.

As for objectification, look at any perfume ad/music video/american apparel ad/so on and so forth. I mean when do you ever see an unattractive woman on TV? They are always dolled up to the nines, men can look however they want

I can't say I agree strongly with this though, in terms of (in)equality.
Look at any ad for cologne or men's fashions and the same can be said about the men in the ads.
This is not to say that the effect of the portrayal of women in the media won't/can't have a negative effect on how women are made to feel they should be, I just feel that it's as prevalent with the portrayal of men, although it seems that there tends to be less of a public outcry from the male perspective. Think of the recent Hunky Dory's campaign versus, say, the Aero ad a while back with the musclebound guy from Sex and the City.
Also, I think advertising that seems to objectify women is often more offensive to the intelligence of the male audience member. Woman in revealing clothes + Crisps + Idiot male couch potato = Higher revenue from crisp sales. Give me a ****ing break. Just as I feel the old 'Diet Coke break' ads are more offensive to women than to men.

Something I also feel is largely portrayed in the media is the 'Ignorant man', wherein the man does something like, I don't know, try to fix a water pipe, fails in a clumsy manner, woman looks at camera with a smirk and rolls eyes, and makes the 'smart move', which is, I don't know, calling the plumber that the ad is for. Weak example, I know, but it's a general theme I've seen in advertising etc. and I don't like it.

Dudess · 01-08-2010 02:24AM

crayolastereo wrote: »

No abortion. The rape culture is that as a woman I'm afraid to go out when its dark

No disrespect but I don't know whether rape is the main danger if a person (not just a woman) ventures out alone late at night to a dodgy/isolated area.

As for objectification, look at any perfume ad/music video/american apparel ad/so on and so forth. I mean when do you ever see an unattractive woman on TV? They are always dolled up to the nines, men can look however they want

I think this issue is multi-fold though - many women have no problem with, and even help uphold, that particular status quo. Plus, a woman who is a model, stripper etc may very much have ownership over her own body - literally choosing these lines of work.

Dudess · 01-08-2010 02:25AM

Sinfonia wrote: »

Something I also feel is largely portrayed in the media is the 'Ignorant man', wherein the man does something like, I don't know, try to fix a water pipe, fails in a clumsy manner, woman looks at camera with a smirk and rolls eyes, and makes the 'smart move', which is, I don't know, calling the plumber that the ad is for. Weak example, I know, but it's a general theme I've seen in advertising etc. and I don't like it.

It's a constant in advertising and it's ****ing pitiful...

Millicent · 01-08-2010 02:36AM

Millicent wrote: »

And it could be argued that the situation is created by a patriarchal system which does not value men's place in the home. That or a hangover from a religious state that frowned upon children born out of wedlock and considered only the nuclear family to be a real one. Check out the Constitution for examples of both these prejudices.

Thought I'd quote what I was referring to:

Article 41

1. 1° The State recognises the Family as the natural primary and fundamental unit group of Society, and as a moral institution possessing inalienable and imprescriptible rights, antecedent and superior to all positive law.

2° The State, therefore, guarantees to protect the Family in its constitution and authority, as the necessary basis of social order and as indispensable to the welfare of the Nation and the State.

2. 1° In particular, the State recognises that by her life within the home, woman gives to the State a support without which the common good cannot be achieved.

2° The State shall, therefore, endeavour to ensure that mothers shall not be obliged by economic necessity to engage in labour to the neglect of their duties in the home.

3. 1° The State pledges itself to guard with special care the institution of Marriage, on which the Family is founded, and to protect it against attack.

2° A Court designated by law may grant a dissolution of marriage where, but only where, it is satisfied that

i. at the date of the institution of the proceedings, the spouses have lived apart from one another for a period of, or periods amounting to, at least four years during the five years,

ii. there is no reasonable prospect of a reconciliation between the spouses,

iii. such provision as the Court considers proper having regard to the circumstances exists or will be made for the spouses, any children of either or both of them and any other person prescribed by law, and

iv. any further conditions prescribed by law are complied with.

3° No person whose marriage has been dissolved under the civil law of any other State but is a subsisting valid marriage under the law for the time being in force within the jurisdiction of the Government and Parliament established by this Constitution shall be capable of contracting a valid marriage within that jurisdiction during the lifetime of the other party to the marriage so dissolved.

So the woman's place life! is in the home (no mention of the man's value in the home) and the family is based upon marriage. That is what is wrong with fathers' rights in this country, not women's lack of caring. I find a good deal of that passage offensive as it makes no provision for single fathers and puts no import on the place of a father in the household.

K-9 · 01-08-2010 02:56AM

Ernest Uptight Handlebar wrote: »

feminism has been so hijacked that it would be difficult to define it under one cause as such. It means different things to different people . Some of it I agree with some of which i have huge problems with.

I would agree and I'd say the OP is disagreeing with the more militant feminism that gets all the publicity.

K-9 · 01-08-2010 03:05AM

The Agogo wrote: »

I've no problem with the principle of feminism (which is gender equality). But we are getting into semantics here. Feminism is just a redundant word is all I'm trying to say. Better to call it Gender Equality or egalitarianism (equality for all).

I'm actually sorry I brought this up at all. *goes to bed* I've got work in 5 hours.

Yes, but surely the notion of mens rights groups has to end to?

I'd a agree with your post. It should be become more about equality for everybody rather than a particular sex. Most issues have been sorted so it has got to the stage that looking for rights for one gender, will automatically lead to the other losing out.

K-9 · 01-08-2010 03:10AM

Sinfonia wrote: »

Thanks, wasn't sure what you meant. Agreed on both points.

I can't say I agree strongly with this though, in terms of (in)equality.
Look at any ad for cologne or men's fashions and the same can be said about the men in the ads.
This is not to say that the effect of the portrayal of women in the media won't/can't have a negative effect on how women are made to feel they should be, I just feel that it's as prevalent with the portrayal of men, although it seems that there tends to be less of a public outcry from the male perspective. Think of the recent Hunky Dory's campaign versus, say, the Aero ad a while back with the musclebound guy from Sex and the City.
Also, I think advertising that seems to objectify women is often more offensive to the intelligence of the male audience member. Woman in revealing clothes + Crisps + Idiot male couch potato = Higher revenue from crisp sales. Give me a ****ing break. Just as I feel the old 'Diet Coke break' ads are more offensive to women than to men.

Something I also feel is largely portrayed in the media is the 'Ignorant man', wherein the man does something like, I don't know, try to fix a water pipe, fails in a clumsy manner, woman looks at camera with a smirk and rolls eyes, and makes the 'smart move', which is, I don't know, calling the plumber that the ad is for. Weak example, I know, but it's a general theme I've seen in advertising etc. and I don't like it.

Indeed. Advertisers and brands don't give a b*llix what sex you are. They'll objectify you if it means more money and profit. Gender isn't the problem. Advertising is.

vicecreamsundae · 01-08-2010 03:52AM

Dudess wrote: »

I think this issue is multi-fold though - many women have no problem with, and even help uphold, that particular status quo. Plus, a woman who is a model, stripper etc may very much have ownership over her own body - literally choosing these lines of work.

yes many women do uphold that kind of patriarchal status quo etc, it's certainly not simply a case of men oppressing women. women's actions and attitudes are often sexist as well, but i don't think it makes the issue multi fold.
also, i would not tell a woman who strips that she is anti feminist, but i can still feel that the way it's perfectly acceptable for men to go to strip clubs and pay money to have women strip and dance for them, while no such similar service is available for hetero women is a HUGE sign of just how unequal our society is.

OutlawPete · 01-08-2010 03:57AM

vicecreamsundae wrote: »

.. while no such similar service is available for hetero women is a HUGE sign of just how unequal our society is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Tt-67LKFHE

Feminism - an Egalitarian term?

Comments