Feminism

[AnimeGirl2501]

Second Wave Feminism is what most of society thinks of when Feminism is mentioned. The likes of the vile Germaine Greer for one.

Third Wave Feminism is inclusive of all women, Second Wave is a decaying dinosaur filled with bigots and prejudices, it's a vile idea.

 

[Trifoilum]

A question I'd like to ask before everything is what came to your mind when you read the word 'feminism'?

Echoing [MENTION=4775]AnimeGirl2501[/MENTION], I think Second Wave is simply put the most iconic and also LOUD form of feminism. Context-wise it is also the time when resistance from the status quo were the stronger, so the actions taken were more extreme.

With the Third Wave; the original part of feminism (women's suffrage, equality in workplace) has already permeated most sociopolitical realm and consensus of people (or at least American and Western Europeans), so that what's left is the 'different' ; the iconic and the loud, the extreme and the prejudiced.

I think feminism in itself is still a growing, expanding social belief; there are still some parts of feminism that's exclusive; cis-oriented, or white-oriented, or educated middle-class oriented, or female-oriented. I'm rolling around Jezebel lately and even within that website people are still constantly educating themselves about how to be more inclusive, how to stand on their feminist beliefs without alienating others-- or in fact, while enveloping different groups.

 

[somethingpancake]

I was speaking with a woman who argued feminism isn't sexist at all, but that it's sole purpose is to focus on female rights and issues. Heu?

 

[Nixie]

I suggest you look up the definition of sexism and practice critical thinking. Seriously *demotes Dom back to the kiddie table*

 

[somethingpancake]

I am aware of the definition, although isn't focusing on one gender's issues while entirely overlooking another's a form of sexism? I'm not saying Feminism is a bad thing, i'm just saying it's sexist.

 

[Nixie]

Sexism is discrimination based upon sex (gender). Focusing on one's sex (gender) and advocating for one's sex (gender) isn't the same as being sexist. That is a big leap off a cliff and illogical. It is like saying that you have an appreciation for Chevy's and therefore, hate and discriminate against Fords. You create assumptions based on a faulty premise. The good news is that the kids sitting at the little table get fed first at Thanksgiving, although, no R rated movies for you.

 

[bionic]

Sexism is discrimination based upon sex (gender). Focusing on one's sex (gender) and advocating for one's sex (gender) isn't the same as being sexist. That is a big leap off a cliff and illogical. It is like saying that you have an appreciation for Chevy's and therefore, hate and discriminate against Fords. You create assumptions based on a faulty premise. The good news is that the kids sitting at the little table get fed first at Thanksgiving, although, no R rated movies for you.

+1

Plus, there are some men out there who support feminism, so there is nothing sexist about the movement if some people of both genders support it. I don't understand how you cannot understand the logic.


Sexism is defined as "prejudice or discrimination based on a person's sex". Feminism is the ideologies and/or collections of movements which support women's rights. So how could Feminism be discriminating someone's sex when it advocates for women? It does not discriminate men as a gender. Most feminist views aren't trying to gain power above men, they are actually trying to achieve.... EQUALITY. So it's not about an imbalance of power - it's about both genders having equal voices.

 

[somethingpancake]

I understand what your'e saying and I could have explained my point differently. I'll remake one at some point on the subject and take more time and attention to explain my point of view. I guess this one came off like more of an illogical rant than anything else. Also, I understand the concept of women fighting for themselves to receive equal treatment in what is essentially "a man's world" and I have nothing against that movement, but today, in 2013, many feminists are just wasting their time rambling on about issues they could overcome themselves by DOING rather than complaining. I have female friends that aren't feminists and don't want to be. Not because they are against women being equal, but because they instead chose to take life on head first and break through the barriers through action. Anything they want, THEY GET. They don't need feminism or any movement to achieve their goals.

I also believe many feminists aren't looking for equality, but to get all the perks without the responsibility.

Again, just the opinion from a guy shamefully sitting at the kid's table. You guys were right about the video, that's on me.

 

[Jack]

Regarding rape, I think feminists will find themselves preaching to the choir most of the time with messages like "don't rape". I think more serious and effective steps should be taken.

Dr. David Lisak demonstrated that most campus rapes are perpetrated not by well-meaning boys confused about consent but by repeat-offender sociopaths who know exactly what they're doing. Treating rape like an unfortunate but understandable miscommunication doesn’t just deny victims justice and downplay the traumatic nature of the experience -- it allows rapists to remain free to rape again and again.

http://prospect.org/article/combating-campus-rape-crisis-0

Lack of empathy can be physiologically detected. If we could push for early detection and some kind of gene therapy, or mandated drugs (for sociopaths), we could eliminate the problem of sociopathy altogether, and that would most likely drastically reduce incidence of rape, among many many many other things.

As far as trying to change traditional gender 'roles' though, I think it won't work. Sure it's great to think about women taking men's traditional 'roles' and being successful in the workplace, but there would be too much of a social stigma on a man who wanted to take a woman's traditional 'role'. The woman would be 'brilliant', 'successful', etc. for being in the workplace. The man would be considered a 'freeloader', or 'loser' for staying in the home. My issue with feminism is that it isn't trying to change how a woman's traditional 'role' is perceived at all, but only trying to make women take on men's traditional 'roles'. I have no doubt, most well read, serious feminists have discussed this already at some point, but I think changing that stigma would really change the playing field so to speak.

 

[Nixie]

Wellllll, I think a lot of emphasis is on breaking away from the idea of strict gender roles to begin with. Our preconceived ideas of "what it is to be a man or woman" so to speak. Rigid social structures are generally a sign of a stagnant social climate. Logically speaking, being progressive fosters innovation, and those sparks that jettison a community forward rather than staid "roles" which keep a community mired.

 

[Gerty]

Oh my.
Yes, feminism is most certainly relevant, even today, when women are allowed to vote and go to work =D

Women are different from men. Our bodies are different, our brains are different, and we live in different worlds. A man will never know the sneaking sense of power - immediately followed by nagging guilt in my case - of seeing the policeman who was preparing to write a ticket slowly put his pad away when he sees a tear in a blue eye and a little tremble in the chin. I won't ever appreciate the hopelessness I've heard my male friends describe when they don't live up to rigid societal expectations of manliness. I have no idea what it would be like to be able to write my name in the snow, and no man will ever know the agony of childbirth or the indescribable feeling when it's over and the bloody, squalling scrap of humanity is first placed in waiting arms.

Equal rights and equal pay are part of feminism, but for me at least, feminism means celebrating the uniquely female part of me - The nurturing side, the intuition, being a mother.

I loved the post about the bra-burning strawman feminist. Thank you. Even in groups titled "The Rabid Feminist," I don't see women bashing men just because they're men.

Appreciating our own feminine traits in no way detracts from our appreciation of masculinity. As a matter of fact, I think it strengthens it. There is nothing sexier than a man who can fix stuff, smells like Ivory soap, and isn't afraid to engage me in debate...And whose self-worth isn't dependent on proving himself superior to me in every way.

It's about choices and being true to ourselves. Wearing towering spike heels because you like to does not make you an anti-feminist, but wearing them because your self-worth depends men finding you sexy does. Staying home to raise your children because it's what you feel deeply is right is not anti-feminist - ditching your career after childbirth because your husband tells you that you must....

A feminist does not pussify men. All she does is highlight the pussification that is already there. A man who respects women as individuals and as a gender is one who is secure in himself.

Men and women are made to work together. When one sex feels the need to suppress/oppress the other to maintain the upper hand, we all lose out.

 

[Trifoilum]

but today, in 2013, many feminists are just wasting their time rambling on about issues they could overcome themselves by DOING rather than complaining. I have female friends that aren't feminists and don't want to be. Not because they are against women being equal, but because they instead chose to take life on head first and break through the barriers through action. Anything they want, THEY GET. They don't need feminism or any movement to achieve their goals.

I also believe many feminists aren't looking for equality, but to get all the perks without the responsibility.

One point I would like to remind you is that the playing field is NOT level yet between genders, or sexuality, or race.
So a 10 given by a white male will net more things than a 10 given by a white female, and even worse if it's a black female or Latin female.

I don't see why complaining about the disparity doesn't matter, or is 'complaining'. The implications is that you're accusing them as lazy, complaining, whining, which is-- frankly, ridiculous.

I would make this comparison; you're essentially saying like, "Well, these introverts should deal with it in this extroverted world and learn to be an extrovert." Only gender had a TON of other baggage, history, and implications.

You say perks, you say responsibility; what are they?

 

[Trifoilum]

Oh my.
Yes, feminism is most certainly relevant, even today, when women are allowed to vote and go to work =D

Women are different from men. Our bodies are different, our brains are different, and we live in different worlds. A man will never know the sneaking sense of power - immediately followed by nagging guilt in my case - of seeing the policeman who was preparing to write a ticket slowly put his pad away when he sees a tear in a blue eye and a little tremble in the chin. I won't ever appreciate the hopelessness I've heard my male friends describe when they don't live up to rigid societal expectations of manliness. I have no idea what it would be like to be able to write my name in the snow, and no man will ever know the agony of childbirth or the indescribable feeling when it's over and the bloody, squalling scrap of humanity is first placed in waiting arms.

Equal rights and equal pay are part of feminism, but for me at least, feminism means celebrating the uniquely female part of me - The nurturing side, the intuition, being a mother.

I loved the post about the bra-burning strawman feminist. Thank you. Even in groups titled "The Rabid Feminist," I don't see women bashing men just because they're men.

Appreciating our own feminine traits in no way detracts from our appreciation of masculinity. As a matter of fact, I think it strengthens it. There is nothing sexier than a man who can fix stuff, smells like Ivory soap, and isn't afraid to engage me in debate...And whose self-worth isn't dependent on proving himself superior to me in every way.

It's about choices and being true to ourselves. Wearing towering spike heels because you like to does not make you an anti-feminist, but wearing them because your self-worth depends men finding you sexy does. Staying home to raise your children because it's what you feel deeply is right is not anti-feminist - ditching your career after childbirth because your husband tells you that you must....

A feminist does not pussify men. All she does is highlight the pussification that is already there. A man who respects women as individuals and as a gender is one who is secure in himself.

Men and women are made to work together. When one sex feels the need to suppress/oppress the other to maintain the upper hand, we all lose out.

I do agree with some points you highlighted.

A very subtle point inside feminism is questioning and calling out standards of masculinity and femininity that's visible and running within society and our social interactions and judgment.
Feminism doesn't mean preventing things or traits-- that, honestly, is not my feminism. >_>;
Feminism for me is for every being, sex, and gender, to be..anyone they like, to be the best they are. To be sensitive or strong, kind or smart, liking frills or swords, cars or nail polishes, etc.
And for the world to offer all of us a fair chance.

 

[the]

One thing that bothers me lately is this idea of privilege. White privilege, male privilege, all things attributed to me that make me unable to understand let alone comment on the hardships others face. What really bugs me the most is the implication that I do not want women to feel like they can walk down the street without getting raped, that I do not want minorities to be able to get paid fairly, etc - all because I am privileged. Like I am hoarding all the privileges for myself.

Anyways, this article lays it all out better than I could: http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/the-privilege-paradigm/

To refer to decent, respectful treatment as a “privilege” is to imply that nobody actually deserves it, when in reality everybody does. And nothing that rightfully belongs to everyone alike can reasonably be called a “privilege”.

 

[the]

ok dear,now i see you're acting like this because i am christian(fundamentalist,like you say). Please dear,if you can't stand my viewpoints,than just move on and don't ever speak to me again. But there is no need to insult me.Have a nice day

Why do you keep using condescending language?

 

[Trifoilum]

One thing that bothers me lately is this idea of privilege. White privilege, male privilege, all things attributed to me that make me unable to understand let alone comment on the hardships others face. What really bugs me the most is the implication that I do not want women to feel like they can walk down the street without getting raped, that I do not want minorities to be able to get paid fairly, etc - all because I am privileged. Like I am hoarding all the privileges for myself.

Anyways, this article lays it all out better than I could: http://maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2013/08/22/the-privilege-paradigm/

I think the idea of privilege becomes harmful / a potential obstacle towards social equality (or understanding) in general when one doesn't consider the effects one's privilege has to their life experience.

I don't know your experience, and if you can explain it more I'd be grateful, but overall I think the sentiment goes like this;
"(I never have to think about being raped myself so) why are these women always talking about rape rape rape"
"(I never have to be bogged down with experienced of racism in my life, so) stop talking about race, this isn't Civil-War America!"

it implies one's attitude or behavior lack sympathy and/or understanding to the other party, who may have experienced an entirely different set of experience based on their race/gender/sexuality/class.

And the writer you linked sort of...missed the point, I think. The use of the word privilege does not mean that everything should be equal / considered equal-- but a LOT of things that aren't equal are based not in merit / achievement but in-- what or how or where you were born.
When your chance of being accepted in job interviews are biased on your skin colors, or name, or gender; that is privilege.
When your security highly varies depending on your skin color, the clothes you wear, how long your hair is; that is privilege.
We are not talking about 'everyone should be equal despite what they do'. Neither are we arguing for 'everyone should suffer'.

I agreed with the writer's statement about everyone should receive that same benefit, but most of the people being called out by feminists / other people USUALLY DON'T. That's the point. They thought the situation right now-- the imbalanced, unfair situation right now, is 'fair' and 'just the way it is'.

We are talking about leveling the playing field and the necessary understanding / empathy to GO there. And understanding that there is a systematic difference that bleds through our daily life is one part of them.

 

[Gktr]

I've always had a great deal of respect for the feminists of yesteryear - the suffragettes who fought for the right to vote and the reformists who wanted legal and economic equality between men and women. During my time at the University, I had the honour of meeting a handful of brilliant female lecturers who were very active in the feminist movement of the 1960's and 1970's, and what they have in common is that they were opposed to specific discriminatory practices which have since been abolished. There are obviously regional differences, and women are still being opporessed in many places around the world, but where I live, discrimination based on sex/gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, or religion is illegal. Modern feminism seems to lack a cause; something to fight for or against.

In its current form, I think feminism does more harm than good. For some reason - I've never really been able to understand why - the feminist movement has begun pretending to fight for gender equality rather than women's rights. That would be fine by me if they practiced what they preach, but sadly that's not the case. Feminists usually aren't very interested in discussing any of the problems that mostly affect men. In OECD countries, three out of four suicides are committed by men, for example. I see that as a far more serious social issue than whether or not the latest Hollywood blockbuster passes the Bechdel test, but when I searched for articles addressing this problem on Ms. Magazine's homepage, all I found was an article describing the ripple effect of male suicide - when an Indian farmer kills himself in despair over agricultural reforms, his wife may end up in financial trouble.

I'm not at all opposed to women's rights; I consider myself an egalitarian, which means I believe in equal rights for everyone regardless of sex, creed, race etc. What I'm opposed to is pretending to be something you aren't, and your average feminist writer is no more interested in righting the wrongs for men than the men in the so-called men's rights movement are in ending discrimination against women.

I think the idea of privilege becomes harmful / a potential obstacle towards social equality (or understanding) in general when one doesn't consider the effects one's privilege has to their life experience.

I don't know your experience, and if you can explain it more I'd be grateful, but overall I think the sentiment goes like this;
"(I never have to think about being raped myself so) why are these women always talking about rape rape rape"
"(I never have to be bogged down with experienced of racism in my life, so) stop talking about race, this isn't Civil-War America!"

The problem I have with the idea of privilege is that you end up putting the blame on a lot of people who are themselves victims - or you end up trivializing individual people's suffering because they happen to belong to a broadly defined group of people who have certain advantages over other groups of people in some areas of life. I don't think your average heroin addict living in an alley somewhere really benefits from any of the privileges his skin colour or sex has supposedly bestowed upon him.

 

[Trifoilum]

The problem I have with the idea of privilege is that you end up putting the blame on a lot of people who are themselves victims

Do explain more?

or you end up trivializing individual people's suffering because they happen to belong to a broadly defined group of people who have certain advantages over other groups of people in some areas of life. I don't think your average heroin addict living in an alley somewhere really benefits from any of the privileges his skin colour or sex has supposedly bestowed upon him.

Systematic privilege does not override personal hardships and/or experience. It is one element of it.

Besides; the idea of privilege spans a lot of aspects;
Race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexuality, class, disability or the lack of it, sometimes even nationality.

If we want to compare privileges on class, we may use the heroin user as an example. But on skin color or sex or gender? I think you have to compare between white heroin addicts and black heroin addicts.

Again, privilege hurts as a form of inconsideration. Simply that.

 

[Gktr]

Do explain more?

I do not doubt that on average, the racial majority in any society is usually far better off than racial minorities, but on an individual level that might not be the case. Even in a predominantly white society, there will be plenty of white people who are worse off than the average black person.

Systematic privilege does not override personal hardships and/or experience. It is one element of it.

Besides; the idea of privilege spans a lot of aspects;
Race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexuality, class, disability or the lack of it, sometimes even nationality.

If we want to compare privileges on class, we may use the heroin user as an example. But on skin color or sex or gender? I think you have to compare between white heroin addicts and black heroin addicts.

What do you think I'll find if I compare a white heroin addicts to black heroin addicts? Granted, we live in different places and there might be regional differences, but I used to be an addict myself and I don't think I was any better off because of my skin colour.

At any rate, I'm not denying that privilege does exist; I'm simply saying that not everyone benefits from it. Of all the different types of privilege you listed, sex is the only one I doubt the existence of - at least if you're talking about a onesided privilege where men win and women lose.

 

[the]

I think the idea of privilege becomes harmful / a potential obstacle towards social equality (or understanding) in general when one doesn't consider the effects one's privilege has to their life experience.

I don't know your experience, and if you can explain it more I'd be grateful, but overall I think the sentiment goes like this;
"(I never have to think about being raped myself so) why are these women always talking about rape rape rape"
"(I never have to be bogged down with experienced of racism in my life, so) stop talking about race, this isn't Civil-War America!"

it implies one's attitude or behavior lack sympathy and/or understanding to the other party, who may have experienced an entirely different set of experience based on their race/gender/sexuality/class.

And the writer you linked sort of...missed the point, I think. The use of the word privilege does not mean that everything should be equal / considered equal-- but a LOT of things that aren't equal are based not in merit / achievement but in-- what or how or where you were born.
When your chance of being accepted in job interviews are biased on your skin colors, or name, or gender; that is privilege.
When your security highly varies depending on your skin color, the clothes you wear, how long your hair is; that is privilege.
We are not talking about 'everyone should be equal despite what they do'. Neither are we arguing for 'everyone should suffer'.

I agreed with the writer's statement about everyone should receive that same benefit, but most of the people being called out by feminists / other people USUALLY DON'T. That's the point. They thought the situation right now-- the imbalanced, unfair situation right now, is 'fair' and 'just the way it is'.

We are talking about leveling the playing field and the necessary understanding / empathy to GO there. And understanding that there is a systematic difference that bleds through our daily life is one part of them.

Certainly it sounds nice the way you explain it. However RE: bolded, when I read about feminism they don't make it clear who they are talking about besides generalities like men, or some derogatory man-meaning word. I just take what they say at face value because it is not like they are talking in person, they have as much time as they want to be clear through their writing.