Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

For those of you interested in feminist issues

Announcements Posted on
The News & Current Affairs and Society forums need more moderators! 20-04-2014
TSR wants you: get involved with Power Hour. 10-04-2014
    • 40 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blu tack)
    This.

    This thread is a pretty good example of why feminism is still important.
    Really? I've been looking through this thread and I still don't see what you're seeing.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spontogical)
    Really? I've been looking through this thread and I still don't see what you're seeing.
    I just had a re-glance through a couple of pages and:

    Calling her complaints 'whining'
    Saying she must be PMSing, repeated references to menstruation.
    Saying that feminists overreact
    Saying that street harassment is not a big deal
    Loads of people saying it's just a man-hating blog- even though she didn't generalise AT ALL.
    Half of the posts inthis thread are just silencing women's justified complaints.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
    And?

    I don't think discussing the reasons why current social norms are harmful to certain groups is a bad thing. I don't think that pushing for change, educating others and trying to empower others is a bad thing. It just so happens that the changes sought are not yet universally (or nearly universally) popular. It's still an issue with minority support, however much everyday folk like to claim they are not sexist/genderist. If it was an issue that had majority support, then pushing for change wouldn't be seen as insidious, pedantic and manipulative. It would be seen as fair, right and just.
    Ok I'll change what I originally wrote?

    I wrote:

    "Feminism has tasked itself with a social engineering program aimed at creating a society it deems virtuous. "

    How about?

    "Bolshevism has tasked itself with a social engineering program aimed at creating a society it deems virtuous. "

    Still ok with that?

    I am playing Devil's Advocate somewhat but I am questioning if it is healthy to have such deployments of power in a society which are capable of changing the way people think and in effect controlling and manipulating them.

    You must admit that the technology the Feminist uses to control or reorder society could be used by some other doctrine/interest/group for their purposes?
    • 40 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blu tack)
    I just had a re-glance through a couple of pages and:

    Calling her complaints 'whining'
    Saying she must be PMSing, repeated references to menstruation.
    Saying that feminists overreact
    Saying that street harassment is not a big deal
    Loads of people saying it's just a man-hating blog- even though she didn't generalise AT ALL.
    Half of the posts inthis thread are just silencing women's justified complaints.
    Ok I've read the entire blog thing she wrote - but I don't know what she expects to gain from this?

    I'm certain if a man wrote about all the things that are going against men in society today; the reaction would be worse?
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
    Because feminism isn't just about equal rights in the law. It's also about social attitudes and social conditioning that creates artificial, harmful and unfair imbalances between people based purely on gender.
    Considering to unbalance this you are going to need to change male views seeing as it is men that are the benefactors of this imbalance, and that this post has attracted 2-3 positive replies from male members, do you think its going about it in the right way?

    The fact that most men will agree with a general point on equality yet this disappears when discussing "feminists" and their issues, it would suggest they are alienating the exact people they need to be have on side.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spontogical)
    Ok I've read the entire blog thing she wrote - but I don't know what she expects to gain from this?

    I'm certain if a man wrote about all the things that are going against men in society today; the reaction would be worse?
    She's explaining why she talks about the patriarchy a lot- I imagine she hopes to convince people that sexism and street harassment are very real.

    If a man writes about issue which affect men in an honest and sincere way, without denigrating all women (which is the m.o. of every 'self procaimed 'Men's Rights Activists' I've ever seen btw) , then more power to him.
    • 40 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blu tack)
    She's explaining why she talks about the patriarchy a lot- I imagine she hopes to convince people that sexism and street harassment are very real.

    If a man writes about issue which affect men in an honest and sincere way, without denigrating all women (which is the m.o. of every 'self procaimed 'Men's Rights Activists' I've ever seen btw) , then more power to him.
    Tsk, 2012 and men and women still can't get along. What a hopeless world.

    Excuse my one-lined rant.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spontogical)
    Tsk, 2012 and men and women still can't get along. What a hopeless world.

    Excuse my one-lined rant.
    That doesn't make any sense.

    Glad that you have apparently seen how much sexism there is in this thread now, though
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blu tack)
    If a man writes about issue which affect men in an honest and sincere way, without denigrating all women (which is the m.o. of every 'self procaimed 'Men's Rights Activists' I've ever seen btw) , then more power to him.
    Just a point, all the way through this you have complained about people generalising feminism as man hating. Then you say that is m.o. of every mens right group you have ever seen.

    Just as an idea I typed "mens rights uk" into google. Two top hits.
    http://www.coeffic.demon.co.uk/
    http://www.parity-uk.org/

    I can't see how either of those are degrading to women. I think either you're a hypocrite on the issue, or you haven't looked very hard when it comes to other side of equality.(which if true means its not about equality)
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    I imagine writing in that style appeals to her usual readership, but I feel that the tone really doesn't do her any favours in trying to get through to anyone beyond those who are already very receptive to the point she's making. She's not only preaching to the converted, but (if you don't mind me stretching the metaphor almost to breaking point) alienating everyone who hasn't yet been converted.

    Now I'm a feminist, and I believe that every sane individual should be a feminist - what does it say about a person if they don't believe that a woman should have the same rights and opportunities as a man? But I find this sort of article very irritating because - while it's not explicit - it includes a lot of anger that seems to be directed at men in general. I think that's something we've seen enough to know it's not an effective device for getting men on board; nobody is going to decide you have the right idea if you try to belittle or insult them into believing it.

    I will say though that most men drastically underestimate the amount of violent and threatening sexual behaviour that is directed at women, and maybe even more tellingly they underestimate the proportion of men that are involved in it. There's a trend towards denying (and even laughing off, in some cases) sexual violence because it's an unpleasant thing for people to have to face up to.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    Just a point, all the way through this you have complained about people generalising feminism as man hating. Then you say that is m.o. of every mens right group you have ever seen.

    Just as an idea I typed "mens rights uk" into google. Two top hits.
    http://www.coeffic.demon.co.uk/
    http://www.parity-uk.org/

    I can't see how either of those are degrading to women. I think either you're a hypocrite on the issue, or you haven't looked very hard when it comes to other side of equality.(which if true means its not about equality)
    I very specifically said 'Men's Rights Activists', which has incidently recently been designated a Hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...ng-about-women (a not-specifically feminist organisation).

    If someone wants to legitimately fight for mens right, I'm all for it. However, it's important to remember that feminism tackles all issues related to gender including men-specific problems.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blu tack)
    I very specifically said 'Men's Rights Activists', which has incidently recently been designated a Hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center http://www.splcenter.org/get-informe...ng-about-women (a not-specifically feminist organisation).

    If someone wants to legitimately fight for mens right, I'm all for it. However, it's important to remember that feminism tackles all issues related to gender including men-specific problems.
    You said men's rights activists, that by definition is anyone involved with actively promoting the rights of men. The article you linked to is for the website MensActivism.org, that is not the same thing, and have no idea how you expected me to make the link that byMen's Rights Activists you mean one specific website. You all said all of them you had seen, so which others are you talking about?

    No it doesn't, by its very wording its bias in favour of advancement in for women specifically. I went on feminism.org one of the top sites delivered by google. Men's resources contains, men against sexism, men against rape, men for change, all male driven for positive changes for women, nothing about women doing the same for any male causes. The same with feminism.com.

    I'm not anti-equality, I just think "feminism" as a movement places all the emphasis on men to work towards women's rights and does nothing to encourage actual equality which by definition will require gaining of rights on both sides.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snozzle)
    Ok I'll change what I originally wrote?

    I wrote:

    "Feminism has tasked itself with a social engineering program aimed at creating a society it deems virtuous. "

    How about?

    "Bolshevism has tasked itself with a social engineering program aimed at creating a society it deems virtuous. "

    Still ok with that?

    I am playing Devil's Advocate somewhat but I am questioning if it is healthy to have such deployments of power in a society which are capable of changing the way people think and in effect controlling and manipulating them.

    You must admit that the technology the Feminist uses to control or reorder society could be used by some other doctrine/interest/group for their purposes?
    What do mean by "the technology the Feminist uses to control or reorder society"?

    For one thing, we don't all use the same methods. There is no united feminist movement. There isn't set of universally agreed upon methods or aims.

    We're not talking about promoting murder, hatred (be it of gender, race, class, etc), abuse, restricted freedoms or exploitation. We're talking about showing people how some social norms, certain language, some behaviour and certain socially ingrained expectations are harming themselves and others. We are all manipulating society. We all push and pull, promote our values and protect our ideals. We all want our own utopia, where people are treated decently (by our own standards) and where injust behaviour is condemed (again, by our own standard). When we judge who gets to have their say we should judge them on the merit of their methods, and not just on what they seek to achieve. Even the most unpopular political ideologies have the right to expression as long as they can argue cogently and produce rational conclusions from true premises.

    Of course 'other groups' could use the same methods as [insert interest group here]. But remember that those methods include things like blog posts, petitions, discussion threads, surveys, studies, academic papers and protests. I'm never going to say that all methods used by feminists are comendable. Clearly, a group of 'feminists' who use underhand, harmful methods to realise their goals (subliminal messaging, violence, abuse, bribery, blackmail, etc) are not to be supported. What about those who produce studies, write academic papers, report their own experiences and use rational discourse to get engagement with the issue? To categorize all feminists as part of a movement that seeks social manipulation and engineering puts a very dark connotation onto the issue. These are not friendly or even charitable words - words that have a neutral feeling. You might as well say that anyone who seeks change is part of a program of social control (ooo, scary language!). Anyone who seeks to make life better, fairer and freer for any group in society. Those who seek to end rape, child abuse, domestic violence, racial hatred, animal abuse, etc. How about 'Feminism has tasked itself with promoting fairness, positivity and freedom in an effort to create a society where people are not judged according to stereotypes of their gender". Suddenly it doesn't sound like we're being invaded by a terrifying and insidious minority that seeks to manipulate us all against our will and without our knowledge.

    How about I turn it around?

    "Anti-child abuse campaigners have tasked themselves with a social engineering program aimed at creating a society they deem virtuous"

    I am really hungover and I'm not sure this makes sense. I'm just trying to highlight the way that the language you are using isn't neutral and makes the whole issue scarier than it is. Control, reorder, deployment of power, etc sounds like we're being invaded, when what is actually happening is we're just talking and hoping that some people (ideally most people) will see the sense in what we are saying. I'm also trying to show you that you can make something scary by implying that 'bad people' (whoever they might be) could use the same methods as feminists to promote their aims, but you can also make something very agreeable by showing how 'good people' can do the same.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)
    You said men's rights activists, that by definition is anyone involved with actively promoting the rights of men. The article you linked to is for the website MensActivism.org, that is not the same thing, and have no idea how you expected me to make the link that byMen's Rights Activists you mean one specific website. You all said all of them you had seen, so which others are you talking about?

    No it doesn't, by its very wording its bias in favour of advancement in for women specifically. I went on feminism.org one of the top sites delivered by google. Men's resources contains, men against sexism, men against rape, men for change, all male driven for positive changes for women, nothing about women doing the same for any male causes. The same with feminism.com.

    I'm not anti-equality, I just think "feminism" as a movement places all the emphasis on men to work towards women's rights and does nothing to encourage actual equality which by definition will require gaining of rights on both sides.
    I said self proclaimed MRAs which are generally accepted to be a homogenous group. Google 'Mens right's activists' and you'll find plenty of their obnoxious quotes.
    I'm not denying that women's rights are more important to most feminists than men's rights, simply because women have further to go than men do. But feminists and 'men's rights' don't have to be incompatible. I'm not saying that men shouldnt fight for stuff too.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blu tack)
    I said self proclaimed MRAs which are generally accepted to be a homogenous group. Google 'Mens right's activists' and you'll find plenty of their obnoxious quotes.
    I'm not denying that women's rights are more important to most feminists than men's rights, simply because women have further to go than men do. But feminists and 'men's rights' don't have to be incompatible. I'm not saying that men shouldnt fight for stuff too.
    I don't think that improves on the statement in anyway. Self proclaimed is anyone who proclaims themself to be something, unless there is overall governing body of men's rights activist, you can be nothing other than a self proclaimed men's right activist. If that was the point you intended to make then okay, but its not what you wrote. I'm not denying that, but I'm pretty sure I can dig up some quotes from women's rights activists, are you going to judge the genre based on that?

    I also disagree women have further to go, the very basis of our society sees women as more valuable than men, a woman is valued upon her being, men are always valued upon what they do, which means unless a man is doing something he is of no value. A woman is generally considered to be more deserving of help or attention than a man, that is proven from birth. It is generally considered a mother is more important than a father, even with custodial rights in this country, women end up with custody of their children a far greater portion of the time. Issues in the workplace, in families, and relationships all stem from perceptions about gender. Feminism for the most part address the idea women can be just as useful and capable and fill all the roles and qualities of men, yet hasn't done anything to address the idea, from both men and women, that a man has any inherent value. That men's emotions are something to be addressed, its not just a case of "man up". What has it done to change the idea in terms of dating, where it is a man's job to pursuer and impress a women, that he has to bring something to the table, she only brings herself.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
    What do mean by "the technology the Feminist uses to control or reorder society"?
    I suppose I mean everything from publications to academic institutions to campaigning to lobbying right through to the state as a coercive and administrative mechanism with its manifold rules, prescriptions, regulations, normalisations etc etc all essentially depriving people of freedom of action, will, and thought.

    (Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
    We are all manipulating society. We all push and pull, promote our values and protect our ideals. We all want our own utopia, where people are treated decently (by our own standards) and where injust behaviour is condemed (again, by our own standard). When we judge who gets to have their say we should judge them on the merit of their methods, and not just on what they seek to achieve. Even the most unpopular political ideologies have the right to expression as long as they can argue cogently and produce rational conclusions from true premises.
    I don't think I am manipulating anyone thanks, except posting pointless rubbish on obscure interweb forums. FYI I do not want a utopia as they do not exist. Half our problems are because of people who think utopias are possible. To quote Holderlin - "What has always made the state a hell on earth has precisely been that man has tried to make it heaven".

    (Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
    Of course 'other groups' could use the same methods as [insert interest group here]. But remember that those methods include things like blog posts, petitions, discussion threads, surveys, studies, academic papers and protests. I'm never going to say that all methods used by feminists are comendable. Clearly, a group of 'feminists' who use underhand, harmful methods to realise their goals (subliminal messaging, violence, abuse, bribery, blackmail, etc) are not to be supported. What about those who produce studies, write academic papers, report their own experiences and use rational discourse to get engagement with the issue? To categorize all feminists as part of a movement that seeks social manipulation and engineering puts a very dark connotation onto the issue. These are not friendly or even charitable words - words that have a neutral feeling. You might as well say that anyone who seeks change is part of a program of social control (ooo, scary language!). Anyone who seeks to make life better, fairer and freer for any group in society. Those who seek to end rape, child abuse, domestic violence, racial hatred, animal abuse, etc. How about 'Feminism has tasked itself with promoting fairness, positivity and freedom in an effort to create a society where people are not judged according to stereotypes of their gender". Suddenly it doesn't sound like we're being invaded by a terrifying and insidious minority that seeks to manipulate us all against our will and without our knowledge.
    Foulcault said that knowledge and power are the same. I don't think we can consider academia as some neutral phenomenon. By gaining knowledge it is advantaging itself (and its client group) in the discourse of power.

    I compared it with Bolshevik ideology just to make a point. Reordering of society to the tune of an 'ism' should always be viewed with suspicion. Granted our modern state deploys more 'soft tyrany' than the awful stuff than the Bolsheviks did, but the effect is the same which is to mold behavior, thoughts, the will of men etc. That which can be used for 'good' can also be used for 'evil', as happened in many cases with the Socialist experiments in the mid-20th century.

    (Original post by Schmokie Dragon)
    I'm also trying to show you that you can make something scary by implying that 'bad people' (whoever they might be) could use the same methods as feminists to promote their aims, but you can also make something very agreeable by showing how 'good people' can do the same.
    I never said feminist are 'bad people' per say but I used language which I feel is appropriate. I think there is a tendency now to abuse language and ironically this was typical of totalitarian regimes. We don't do 'manipulation' or 'indoctrination' we 'educate' or 'inform', people are not 'controlled' they are 'helped'. I am not saying it is cynical just we think about it in a very flattering light.
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by snozzle)
    I suppose I mean everything from publications to academic institutions to campaigning to lobbying right through to the state as a coercive and administrative mechanism with its manifold rules, prescriptions, regulations, normalisations etc etc all essentially depriving people of freedom of action, will, and thought.
    These are methods and resources avaliable to any group that would like to see change; legal, social, economic, etc.

    I don't think I am manipulating anyone thanks, except posting pointless rubbish on obscure interweb forums. FYI I do not want a utopia as they do not exist. Half our problems are because of people who think utopias are possible. To quote Holderlin - "What has always made the state a hell on earth has precisely been that man has tried to make it heaven".
    My point is that purely by interacting with others, we are putting our mark (however small) on the world. By talking to me (and others in this thread) about the nature of social change and those who fight for it, you are promoting your beliefs and ideals. You may not want a utopia but I'm sure you have values - whether they are widely accepted or more unconventional - and it would be rather astonishing if you didn't believe that people should behave in a certain way or shouldn't do certain things.

    Foulcault said that knowledge and power are the same. I don't think we can consider academia as some neutral phenomenon. By gaining knowledge it is advantaging itself (and its client group) in the discourse of power.
    Well, yes. But this isn't necessarily a bad thing, although the guise of 'expert' opinions have been used to promote irrational and damaging practices in the past. It's a resource, a method, an approach. It's not something unique to feminism (or to remove the 'ism', it's not something unique to those who think gender isn't relevant when assessing someone's worth or treatment).

    I compared it with Bolshevik ideology just to make a point. Reordering of society to the tune of an 'ism' should always be viewed with suspicion. Granted our modern state deploys more 'soft tyrany' than the awful stuff than the Bolsheviks did, but the effect is the same which is to mold behavior, thoughts, the will of men etc. That which can be used for 'good' can also be used for 'evil', as happened in many cases with the Socialist experiments in the mid-20th century.
    It's only an 'ism' because that's a quick, unifying term. It doesn't have to be an 'ism'. We should be suspicious of anything that is obscure and unclear. That isn't a bad thing and being suspicious doesn't mean the thing we are suspicious of is bad either. Curiosity and a thirst for understanding is something we should all aspire to, if we want to understand our world and make meaningful choices.

    That which is used for evil can also be used for good. We're not talking about forcibly re-ordering society. We're talking about using facts, meshing them together with theories and presenting a rational argument for why certain things are unfair or harmful, and why people should re-consider doing them. It's about getting a discussion going.

    I never said feminist are 'bad people' per say but I used language which I feel is appropriate. I think there is a tendency now to abuse language and ironically this was typical of totalitarian regimes. We don't do 'manipulation' or 'indoctrination' we 'educate' or 'inform', people are not 'controlled' they are 'helped'. I am not saying it is cynical just we think about it in a very flattering light.
    No, but you tried to get me to see your point by saying (and I paraphrase) 'lets not talk about feminists, lets use the same argument for Bolsheviks'. You wanted to get me to think about the situation in a new light by using my argument (well, actually your phrasing which I responded to) for a different group (one that you presumably assumed I wasn't in favour of). You thus implied that this new group were 'bad people' and that if I wanted to promote feminist methods of social change I must be consistent and promote other (bad) groups using the same methods, if I don't think there is anything wrong with the methods. My response was the take a group that is fairly universally considered 'good' (campaigners against child abuse) and show how we can do the same.

    We should be mindful of words. Using a 'nice' word like education for a manipulative process such as brainwashing is a fairly standard tactic that is used by governments, interest groups and others. We also have to remember that the nice, safe sounding words are not just euphemisms, they also have their own use and their own meaning when used correctly. Just because I say 'feminists seek to educate' doesn't mean I am abusing the language. I might be, but you'd have to enquire as to my meaning to find out if I was.

    All of your points here apply to any group that seeks change. This is not a problem with feminism. Are you just highlighting areas where we should be cautious or warning us against any movement for change? If we want better schooling, reduced crime, more support for the military, a reduction in drug use, fewer 'accidental' pregnancies, etc we have to use certain methods to inform others of the dangers of certain behaviour and the advantages of others. Of course, those methods can be used to promote rather darker interests - if we 'educate' and convince some that all black people are stupid and inclined to criminality, we can potentially turn the public against black people and perhaps even the authorities. That doesn't mean that the basic technique - information exchange - is bad.

    As with everything, it can be used for good or ill, and what is considered 'good' and what is 'ill' is different for different people.

    So, in short, this is not an argument against feminism. This is an argument against anyone who wants to promote change. Heck, it even applies to those who want to keep things as they are in the face of change. It applies to all walks of life. Do we stop writing journals, commissioning studies, making petitions, etc? Do we stop talking on forums and stop writing blogs?
    • 5 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by doggyfizzel)

    I also disagree women have further to go, the very basis of our society sees women as more valuable than men, a woman is valued upon her being, men are always valued upon what they do, which means unless a man is doing something he is of no value. A woman is generally considered to be more deserving of help or attention than a man, that is proven from birth. It is generally considered a mother is more important than a father, even with custodial rights in this country, women end up with custody of their children a far greater portion of the time. Issues in the workplace, in families, and relationships all stem from perceptions about gender. Feminism for the most part address the idea women can be just as useful and capable and fill all the roles and qualities of men, yet hasn't done anything to address the idea, from both men and women, that a man has any inherent value. That men's emotions are something to be addressed, its not just a case of "man up". What has it done to change the idea in terms of dating, where it is a man's job to pursuer and impress a women, that he has to bring something to the table, she only brings herself.
    It's not just about value. If a woman is valued because she is a woman, and a man is valued by what he is capable of, then that is an imbalance that needs to be addressed. It's not just about who society treats more nicely, or who gets the most perks. It's about whether gender is a fair basis for treating people a certain way and making certain judgements about them. If you read much feminist literature, you'll say that a LOT is being said about how patriarchy and misogyny affect men, and how this is also NOT OK. I object just as powerfully to telling men to 'man up' as I do to telling a woman that she isn't 'ladylike', and so do a huge number of modern feminists.

    Sadly, the very term 'feminist' covers a broad range of people and a broad range of ideals. It also sounds very 'woman centric', while a lot of feminists are as powerfully against areas where men are treated unfairly by the system and society as they are against areas where women are treated badly. Not to mention the whole range of non-binary genders that often get sidelined in the debate. You do get the man-hating bunch who want an authoritarian, matriarchal society and you get others who actually don't really care, they just like to say they're in favour of gender equality while behaving in a sexist manner. And you get everyone in between. The only way to really engage with the issue is to read, watch, listen and discuss while trying to find the sense in various positions and working out where you stand, and what merit there is in certain views.
    • 14 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by screenager2004)
    People who call feminists 'man hating' essentially just want women to shut up and not complaint about their treatment as second rate citizens in the world.
    may i ask what makes you say that theyre treated as second rate citizens ? :s
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cl_steele)
    may i ask what makes you say that theyre treated as second rate citizens ? :s
    'second class citizens' is a strong statement- but here's a piece of writing i came across earlier today which I think displays at least some of the ways in which women are treated worse than men (it's quite long, but effective, I think)

    ' As long as women’s natural body hair is called disgusting and inappropriate while men’s isn’t, I am a feminist.

    As long as I can’t watch an episode of a popular sitcom without having to sit through multiple sexist comments or “jokes”, I am a feminist.

    As long as women have to face the rational fear of being sexually assaulted every time they walk home past dark while men don’t, I am a feminist.

    As long as misogyny exists in any country in this world, I am a feminist.

    As long as women are being raped, then stoned to death or forced to marry their rapist, I am a feminist.

    As long as companies promote men to manager when there are women who are equally as or better qualified, because they find that men look more authoritative, I am a feminist.

    As long as women (her choice of clothes, her friendly nature, her weakness, her choice to drink alcohol) get blamed when men rape them, I am a feminist.

    As long women’s opinions on online social networks are dismissed with phrases like “tits or gtfo”, “get back to the kitchen”, “are you pms’ing?”, I am a feminist.

    As long as dressing like a woman is degrading for men and as long as men are insulted with phrases like “you throw like a woman”, clearly implying that being like a woman is shameful, I am a feminist.

    As long as both men are women are expected to work, but taking care of children and the household are still largely considered a woman’s job, I am a feminist.

    As long as boys and girls are treated differently, expected to act differently, and surrounded by different toys and colours from the day they are born, I am a feminist.

    As long as topless women aren’t allowed in public unless they’re on the cover of a men’s magazine, I am a feminist.

    As long as women who have sex frequently are generally told they are “sluts”, “lacking self-respect” and “lacking morals” by both men and women, while men who frequently have sex are “just being men” and it’s “natural for them”, I am a feminist.

    As long as there are places where women have to pay more for health insurance than men, I am a feminist.

    As long as men experience situations with equal gender representation as female-dominated, and don’t consider a group discussion equal unless there are significantly more men than women participants (as has been proven), I am a feminist.

    As long as there are men who think it’s their wife or girlfriend’s duty to have sex with them whenever they want, I am a feminist.

    As long as the word feminism (“the movement aimed at equal rights for women”) has a negative connotation, I am a feminist.

    As long as misogynistic people exist, I am a feminist.

    (originally from here http://introspectivestardust.tumblr....-am-a-feminist)

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?

    this is what you'll be called on TSR

  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?

    never shared and never spammed

  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By completing the slider below you agree to The Student Room's terms & conditions and site rules

  2. Slide the button to the right to create your account

    Slide to join now Processing…

    You don't slide that way? No problem.

Updated: April 14, 2012
Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.