Are you a feminist?

[Lex]

Right from when I was a kid it was pretty common to hear the cry, "Sexist!" coming from my mouth. Sexism has always pissed me off, since way back when. I definately consider myself to be a feminist.

But when I was a teen, and feeling my most masculine (so far in my life, anyway), I found it hard to be both a guy and a feminist. I mean, men can be feminists too, but you are less likely to hear them say anything about it, unless you ask. It was easier to fit in as a guy by not saying anything about it.

Now I have no problem being a feminist when I'm feeling like a guy. But when I was younger I found it confusing.

So I ask you, are you a feminist? And if so, does this conflict with wanting to fit in as a guy?

[Thornton]

because I'm not really sure what it means (to others) to be a feminist. It's not like I degrade women or anything. I support equal opportunity. I think it's sad that women's FIFA (yes, it actually does exist) didn't get even a single measly commercial. I feel that objectification of the female body is disgusting, and I could go on and on with points like these, but, do any of these make me a feminist? I've always felt that the term "feminist" is a strong political/social term that required one to be at least moderately educated and socially active in current affairs relating to women's rights. I cannot claim to be that. So, I don't mind if someone calls me a feminist. I just don't think I deserve the title.

As for my views conflicting with my ability to fit in as male, if some dude likes me less because I see women as equals, then he just lost a friend. I'd rather be alone than hang out with a person like that.

[sandra-leigh]

(A recent TS discussion related to this can be found at the somewhat emotive topic "Transsexualism: Illusion and Reality" )

[brylram]

No, I am not a feminist. I believe in equal rights for men and women, and feminism too often seeks for the best circumstances for women, regardless of (or even in the hopes of causing) any negative effects for men. I realize that there are feminists who want equal rights rather than to create a matriarchy... but I honestly think that feminism by nature cannot achieve that.

[charlotte_sp]

I agree with Thornton that the feminist label comes along with a lot of baggage, but I would consider myself one in that I'm aware of and notice women's issues, misogyny, sexism, objectification, etc.

Like Lex, I've found it a little awkward to be a male and feminist
One of the current problems after all is that it is predominantly men who are making a lot of the important decisions that affect women's issues (e.g. abortion, burqas, etc.).

I think brylram has a point in that there is some overcompensation, but generally I don't believe it is really an issue compared to the unfairness faced by the large majority of women.
That's not even taking into account the humans rights abuses often directed towards women outside of the US, Europe, etc.

Sexism is often subtle and ingrained in every day habits, so it is very hard to get people to change their attitudes.
In my opinion, that is the main reason legislation alone can't guarantee women's rights.
I think it's similar to LBGT rights, in that we need a shift in culture to really make these kinds of prejudices disappear.

[brylram]

I think brylram has a point in that there is some overcompensation, but generally I don't believe it is really an issue compared to the unfairness faced by the large majority of women.

K yeh, this is what I mean... I hate that attitude, that "oh well, women have more unfairness than men so it's ok."

No.

Any unfairness is not ok, regardless of what has happened in the past. I am disgusted by the fact that the same people who say they are "fighting for equality" are so comfortable saying "it's ok to treat you as inherently lesser in value or morality;" and/or "women have suffered so now it's your turn." (Not aimed at you Charlotte, but at the many people who have given me a negative impression of feminism.)

I have a lot to say, but I'm still deciding whether I should sit this one out or not. We'll see...

[Lex]

Hmm, an interesting response so far. It seems a shame that people shy away from the label of being a feminist because of extremists. And it's not just here, I find it everywhere. People who believe in equality for women but don't want to be called feminists.

In my opinion, a feminist is someone who wants equality for women and men, not a matriarchy. Feminists don't hate men, just the patriarchal society and how it effects people.

As for my views conflicting with my ability to fit in as male, if some dude likes me less because I see women as equals, then he just lost a friend. I'd rather be alone than hang out with a person like that.

What I'm talking about is never that bad. It's not like the guys I know think that women should be treated as second class citizens. It's just that most guys don't really seem to see (or perhaps they just don't verbalize it?) the sexism as much as most women. Probably because it doesn't effect them as much/it effects them in a different way. And hell, most women don't seem to have as much of a problem with sexism as I do. Even though I'm more verbal now then I was as a teen, I still tone it down. What comes out of my mouth is nothing compared to what is inside my head.

[Ze]

Yes.

The "F" word just has a bad rap these days. Just like any other group, it takes a few loud idiots to ruin it for everybody else. Especially if already coupled with a societal bias.

[charlotte_sp]

In my opinion, a feminist is someone who wants equality for women and men, not a matriarchy.

I agree that this is exactly the problem.
The term is often polarized depending on the person, so there's always this pressure to define exactly what you mean by feminism.

K yeh, this is what I mean... I hate that attitude, that "oh well, women have more unfairness than men so it's ok."

I do understand where you're coming from, and I agree that any kind of intervention to support women's rights should try to avoid that kind of discrimination.

At the risk of being confrontational, I have to say I completely agree with the sentiment "oh well, women have more unfairness than men so it's ok."

When I say that though, I don't mean we should implement legislation and plans that support women and purposefully discriminate against men.
I mean that if we are considering a plan that helps protect women from an institutional prejudice, we should not hold back because it is not perfect and may be unfair in a small number of situations.

For example, sexual harassment laws address a long-standing issue for working women.
I would argue that it is not completely or even mostly gone today.
Every now and then though, you will hear a story about a woman who takes advantage of the law.

My argument would be that those cases, while definitely unfair, are outweighed by the advantages of having these protections in place.
I don't think any practical plan to support equal opportunities for women can avoid these kinds of incidents, so we just have to do our best to minimize them.
Ideally, we should not have to do these kinds of things in the first place, but the reality of it, in my opinion, just doesn't give us the luxury of idealism.

[Andy66]

Yes I'm a feminist. I'm also a masculinist (if there is such a word). I believe in equality. It bothers me when I see a woman being treated like an idiot, a weakling, or a sex object. But it also bothers me when I hear women say things like "that's men's work," or sexually harassing and embarrassing men, and claiming the men enjoy it.

[Ze]

I'm also a masculinist (if there is such a word).

OMG! I use that exact same word myself!

[Andy66]

OMG! I use that exact same word myself!

I knew there was something I like about you.

[AnonyMouse]

Unfortunately, radical feminists and/or irritatingly self-absorbed white feminists ruin it for the rest of us.

I wouldn't call myself a masculinist. Don't get me wrong; I can see pretty easily how men (especially men like us) are affected negatively by sexism, and that portion of the patriarchal foundation needs to come down as well. However, being a feminist pretty much covers it, in my opinion. The way I see it, if you can remove the male-centric mindset that expects certain things from women, you will also tear away the part that expects other things from men. Men will not face unrealistic expections when women are truly seen as their equals.

Unless, of course, we define "equals" as "held to the same absurd standards as men" - but then, that really doesn't count as dismantling the system. It's just a memetic mutation that would arise in an effort to placate those annoying complaining women and end up perpetuating the problem.

[Jada]

I was raised to believe that there was nothing I couldn't do, provided I wanted to do it.

As I grew up, I realized that things didn't always work out this way. For one thing, pay! I soon learned that males doing the same job that I was, got more money than me. This wasn't always the case. But it was with some jobs.

I also pulled an attitude for a while that I could do things that some other females refused to do. Like drive a forklift and load stinky, heavy bags of steer manure into the backs of people's cars. And for what? In the end, it really didn't get me anywhere. But it was a job and I was able to support myself doing it.

OTOH, I am a very good actress and I could and would play the proverbial dumb blonde when I needed to. Now that only worked when I was younger. I'm in my 50's now and wouldn't dare do that. Oddly, I would get angry with other women when I saw them do the same thing.

I worked with an elderly woman who protested that she couldn't put a piece of furniture together because she was a woman. I was like... Wha? I actually enjoy putting stuff together like bikes and furniture. Unless of course the directions were written by some person who does not speak English as their first language and the parts bag is missing some things. Then I tend to not like it so well.

So I have changed some as I aged. I still believe in equality. But having lived through the 70's and the 80's and having been forced to listen to some radical feminists speak when I was in Jr. High, the word just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. So, no. I wouldn't call myself one. But I'm also not too keen on labels either.

[4serrus]

In a word, yes, I am a feminist. Whatever the hell you want to think that means.

[Fab Karen]

For example, sexual harassment laws address a long-standing issue for working women.
I would argue that it is not completely or even mostly gone today.
Every now and then though, you will hear a story about a woman who takes advantage of the law.

My argument would be that those cases, while definitely unfair, are outweighed by the advantages of having these protections in place.
I don't think any practical plan to support equal opportunities for women can avoid these kinds of incidents, so we just have to do our best to minimize them.
Ideally, we should not have to do these kinds of things in the first place, but the reality of it, in my opinion, just doesn't give us the luxury of idealism.

Definitely don't throw out the baby with the bath-water. Clearly defined rules might solve that problem. A woman coming to work in a low-cut top with no bra & bending over in front of people should not file harassment for people looking. And then attempted abuse of it would need some kind of punishment.

Yes, the word has some negative connotations due in part to the minority extremists who do things like creating new words ( like "womyn" because women "has men in it" )

[Thomas]

I feel kindof ashamed to admit it, but I actually tend to be slightly sexist towards women. I tend to look down on them. But maybe it's because I can't relate well to them, and most of the ones I've been exposed to are the girly-girl... rich... air-headed types who are irresponsible and selfish and ignorant. I find it hard to respect them. Of course, this gets rather confusing considering the fact that I'm bi.

There are certain girls that, for some reason or another, are an exception to this and that I find easy to respect and treat as an equal. These exceptions are usually because they're rather intelligent or tom-boyish or MTF. It's the girly or the dim-witted ones that I really can not respect.

I dislike having those feelings, and I try to stop it, but I don't deny that it's there. Maybe it's because I'm trans... because it started shortly after I came out about being a guy. Perhaps because I hate my old self so much, and I dislike anything remotely girly about myself.

[Thornton]

and most of the ones I've been exposed to are the girly-girl... rich... air-headed types who are irresponsible and selfish and ignorant. I find it hard to respect them.

see, I don't feel it's sexist to look down on those types as I don't consider them to be women anyway. I think it's offensive to women to include those types in the category of women.

[Lorileah]

wow it is amazing how enlightened I become on these boards. I do live in a fantasy world I guess.

Maybe I am misreading things here but how in the world does someone who is a member of a group who is consistently looked down upon look down upon another group? I have discussed this before (although I don't remember if it was here...I think it was). I guess it is human nature? How did that song go? there is the green one who doesn't like the yellow one who doesn't like the red one who doesn't like the back one? Different strokes for different folks.

If I am misreading the point here please forgive me and help me out

[Elsa von Spielburg]

Anna and Ze got it right. I am a feminist, even though the word gets an awful rap due to the loud, illogical ones. Being a feminist isn't about superiority to men or forcing women into societal traditionally-male roles or having "more" freedoms than men. It's about having choice and equality: the choice to play whatever role in society that they see fit, as men have more of this luxury (but not all of it, there's still problems in the perception of males, too. I do like the "masculinist" term).

see, I don't feel it's sexist to look down on those types as I don't consider them to be women anyway. I think it's offensive to women to include those types in the category of women.

I gotta say, I really REALLY don't like this line of thinking. It IS sexist because Thomas is seeing the state of being female as some kind of affliction. That Thomas said some girls are better because they are tomboyish, intelligent, or not "girly" is pretty much the definition of sexism.

Heck, and to say that these airheads are not ‘real’ women is also harmful. Call them stupid, call them vapid, and call them materialistic for all I care, that’s not the issue here. Those all could be very true, but it’s true because they are stupid, vapid, materialistic PEOPLE, not because they are women. To say so is offensive to both the “good ones” because it’s saying the female part of their identity is a hindrance, and the “bad ones” because it’s denying them one of their basic identities.

… hrm, did that make any sense?

[Thornton]

Anna and Ze got it right. I am a feminist, even though the word gets an awful rap due to the loud, illogical ones. Being a feminist isn't about superiority to men or forcing women into societal traditionally-male roles or having "more" freedoms than men. It's about having choice and equality: the choice to play whatever role in society that they see fit, as men have more of this luxury (but not all of it, there's still problems in the perception of males, too. I do like the "masculinist" term).



I gotta say, I really REALLY don't like this line of thinking. It IS sexist because Thomas is seeing the state of being female as some kind of affliction. That Thomas said some girls are better because they are tomboyish, intelligent, or not "girly" is pretty much the definition of sexism.

Heck, and to say that these airheads are not ‘real’ women is also harmful. Call them stupid, call them vapid, and call them materialistic for all I care, that’s not the issue here. Those all could be very true, but it’s true because they are stupid, vapid, materialistic PEOPLE, not because they are women. To say so is offensive to both the “good ones” because it’s saying the female part of their identity is a hindrance, and the “bad ones” because it’s denying them one of their basic identities.

… hrm, did that make any sense?

ok, I knew my post would face a lot of confusion and backlash. So, I'm gonna clarify. I'm sorry I included the "girly-girl" part in my quote. I take that back. I have no problem with or look down on anyone behaving in a feminine manner. I do not feel tomboyish women are any better than non-tomboyish ones. I do not feel intelligence is a masculine trait. Intelligence can be found in anybody; I have known a lot of very intelligent girly girls in my life and I've respected them completely and had no problem.

That being said, I do not consider selfish, irresponsible, ignorant airheaded women to be women. Likewise, I do not consider selfish, irresponsible, ignorant airheaded men to be men. In general, I do not consider selfish, irresponsible, ignorant airheaded people to be people, and if you fail at one of the first steps at being a human, consequently you will fail at the subsequent steps (being a woman, man, genderqueer, anythig else).

[Elsa von Spielburg]

Heh, alright.

[sandra-leigh]

History has many examples of "real people" treating "not real people" as animals (or worse). It's a favorite tactic: propaganda and demonize until the other group is "less than human" and thus killing or enslaving them has only the same moral dimension as culling a herd to prevent "infection".

I could give numerous examples, but it is depressing and redundant as I am sure you already know quite a few.

[Thornton]

This is true. However, it has always been that the "real people" that dehumanize the "not real people" do so on traits the "not real people" could not help (gender, race, sexuality, physical/mental abilities) or traits that were harmless on their own, in their difference (religion, politics, nationality, culture). I'm sure I've missed many examples in my parenthesis. But my point is, ignorance, irresponsibility, and selfishness at the cost of others are harmful and can be helped.

I think I'm taking this thread off course...

[sandra-leigh]

Selfishness -- it is very difficult to cure Narcistic Personality Disorder... reduce it perhaps, but by the time it has reached NPD it is considered an innait trait.

Ignorance -- Look up "The Knowledge Doubling Curve". The exact rate of the curve varies according to your source, but a commonly listed figure is that the amount of human knowledge is currently doubling every 18 months and that the rate of doubling is increasing. I have seen it written that elementary school children today are taught more than the lifetime learning of the average "well-educated person" of 150 years ago, and that high-school children are taught more than all but the most knowledgible "Renessance Man". For example, by age 8 as a very intermittent hobby, I knew more about electricity than was known by any human until the last part of the 1800's.

The point about this doubling of knowledge is that no human can possibly keep up. Any individual human grows more and more ignorant. Until humans can learn to double their rate of learning every year, being ignorant is not possible to overcome, no matter how much effort one puts into it.