Feminism should be universally oppossed.

Feminism is, as they say, the doctrine that mandates equality of opportunity between the sexes, and that’s a notion I am on-board with.

But the fundamental underpinnings of feminism as practiced (and not as stated) is “yes, feminism is about equality between the sexes, but since women were historically oppressed, they face more difficulties and hence, we are only going to work to help women and oppose anyone who tries to help men”. In essence, feminism has devolved into identity politics for women.

And herein lies the meat of my disagreement with the movement. You see, just because a demographic has been historically oppressed, doesn’t mean that the group faces more oppression today than another group, even after the removal of institutional hindrances to equality. On top of that, if we were to talk about history, men were (and often are) treated as expendable cannon fodder, to be sent off and killed in war to protect women and the elites (both men and women). Hence, the narrative of “male oppressor, female oppressed” is a gross oversimplification, if not an obfuscation of actual historical fact. Therefore, the operational rationale behind feminism in the West is questionable to say the least.

But to be pithy, I fundamentally don’t believe that women, especially white upper middle class women in the West are an “oppressed minority”, because neither are these women oppressed nor are they a minority. And that’s my starting point in any sort of discussion regarding gender.This puts me at odds with institutional feminism (and some individual feminists), but that’s fine, because I don’t intend to entertain any sort of debate or dialogue with anyone identifying with the movement as that would be an exercise in abject futility.

Honestly, to elucidate in gory detail the full extent of my disagreement with the movement would be to make my answer so long as to bore even the most voracious and patient of my readers much more than it already has at this point. But to the extent that my readers are acquainted with the soul or source of my opposition to institutional feminism, I believe this answer is accurate.

EDIT: the title is misleading, I do not believe feminism should be universally oppossed but rather that it should be oppossed in the west.

(edited 5 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Fenneko

Oh, totally. I'm sure there will be many who disagree (it's TSR, after all), but it seems pretty clear to me that feminism already achieved what it initially wanted in the west, and they got it. Nowadays it's... something else.

Reply 2

Fenneko

Did you just assume the OP's gender?

>If you haven't read 800 page books, then you're probably misinformed and know nothing about the subject

Please.

Reply 3

username3363620

I agree with everything said, apart from one thing: the title. You say that "feminism should be universally opposed". This is wrong; opposed in the West, where it is mainly (not always, of course) used as a means by some women in order to be treated like special snowflakes, that yes. But in countries where discrimination against women is very real, especially in Muslim majority countries, feminism is needed, like it was needed in the West in the early 20th century, it should be encouraged.

Reply 4

Fenneko

It's not so much if you're right or wrong, but more the fact that you assumed their gender. They could be an attack helicopter for all we know.

You do know there are other sources besides books, right?

Reply 5

Fenneko

What's there to understand? You're either a biological male or a biological female.

Nobody's contesting that feminism played an important part in western society 100 odd years ago, but we're talking about its role in present-day society.

Reply 6

Axiomasher

Original post by Wolfram Alpha

...the meat...fodder...pithy...voracious...source...

Ok, that last one was a stretch but, you hungry bro?

Attachment not found

(edited 5 years ago)

Reply 7

HighOnGoofballs

Do you think reading books is the only way one can understand feminisms arguments? It certainly helps, but to be considered knowledgeable, one simply has to demonstrate it through what he says. I think you and I can both agree that OP demonstrates he clearly isn't knowledagble, but I would disagree with you that reading books is the only way to obtain said knowledge on any given topic. I don't think you outright said that, but it was heavily implied - correct me if I'm wrong.

Reply 8

k.n.h.

Only the radical versions of feminism - people following feminism by wanting equality or fairness in issues that are needed are more than ok. And what do you mean when you say universally opposed? If it means in all issues and places, absolutely not, one example would be geographical: there are still a plethora of countries where feminism is of a great tool for progress.

(edited 5 years ago)

Reply 9

Fenneko

Do you deny that there are only two biological sexes?
I'm not interested in this "gender is a social construct" stuff. It's beyond old now and been debunked many times.

I like how you were so underwhelmed by the original post that you had to add this cheap shot in. You're effectively assuming I'm uneducated because I hold a different opinion to your own.

Umm.. okay.

Reply 10

Wolfram Alpha

Original post by Apogeotou

Apologies, the title was slightly misleading. Feminism should not be universally be oppossed but it should very much be oppossed in the west.

I agree. If anything some seem to have taken 'equality of the sexes' quite differently, in the sense that they feel men and women are in fact the same. That it is only genitalia that differentiates them. When in fact, men and women are very different. Of course there are overlaps and those that stray from the 'norm', but in general, there are clear behavioural differences that are not just environmental, as a lot of feminisits would like you to believe, but biological.
So yes, I am here for equality of opportunity. But men and women are not the same.

What comes to the mind is this whole getting women into STEM. I went to a boys grammar school during sixthform and we would get these newsletters...only for the girls by the way, encouraging us to go on these STEM days. I know they have good intentions, and it is not a bad thing to want to encourage women who may have thought STEM was not a thing for them because they are a woman. But I genuinely think...this is not really a thing anymore. Women have been told for a while now they can do whatever they want, and so I no longer think a societal pressue telling woman they cannot excel in the STEM field exists in the West. Now we have been given equality of opportunity, equality of outcome should in no way be forced. People should be awarded by merit. And if women are so fantastic...well we are if I say so myself :u:

, then if we want to we can choose STEM subjects. But if many women still would rather, be a nurse for example, then I genuinely do not see any societal pressures pushing them towards that specifically. Maybe most women just tend to prefer some fields over others. But if you are a woman who would much rather work in STEM...then fantastic, go for it. Nothing stopping ya.

Reply 13

Fenneko

I don't believe you answered the question.
And I wouldn't say they are different.

What good is an appeal to authority in this argument? Every major medical institution said that homosexuality was a mental disorder years ago. They were wrong. The UN is just the UN, who cares?

Familiarity and agreement are two different things.

Reply 14

k.n.h.

Highlight the relation to feminism? I don't get it.

Reply 15

Axiomasher

Original post by Joel 96

I might have you wrong here but the argument that feminism in relation to the West should be dropped because it has largely achieved its aims (at least legalistically) is a little like arguing that opposition to racism should be dropped because we now have laws which protect vulnerable groups from discrimination. Legal protection is very important but it's not everything and can easily be subverted where there is no vigilance for enforcement. I'm not supporting extreme forms of feminism here, very few do, but the idea, that feminism as a movement more generally has jumped over all of its important hurdles and can retire, is shortsighted.

Reply 16

fhgedie

Feminism in countries such as the USA and the UK isn't really needed anymore. Women have equal rights and in fact, in most areas, have even more privileges than men. Programmes that guide women toward STEM subjects are in place all over the world but there are no programmes that usher men into jobs that aren't generally taken by men. Feminism is ruined. While in many middle-eastern countries or developing countries women are actually oppressed and not given the right to education, modern feminists are upset by 'issues' such as manspreading. That is not what feminism is. Feminism should be standing up for equal rights of women. However, in most places, women do have equal rights. Therefore, feminism in developed countries like America, Britain, Canada, France, or Germany should be opposed but should be practised in less fortunate places that actually need it. And I swear to god if anyone tries to claim the wage gap exists I will report them 358327 times.

Reply 17

Fenneko

Original post by Axiomasher

If you're arguing that the feminist movement still has a lot do, then I'd at least like to know what it is you want. I thought that the recent women's marches would give me some indication as to what feminism today strives for, but even they didn't seem to have a clue on what they were marching for.

Reply 18

fhgedie

Feminism in countries such as the USA and the UK isn't really needed anymore. Women have equal rights and in fact, in most areas have even more privileges than men. Programmes that guide women toward STEM subjects are in place all over the world but there are no programmes that usher men into jobs that aren't generally taken by men. People like Buzzfeed are completely ruining feminism. While in many middle-eastern countries or developing countries women are actually oppressed and not given the right to education, modern feminists are upset by 'issues' such as manspreading. That is not what feminism is. Feminism should be standing up for equal rights of women. However, in most places, women do have equal rights. Therefore, feminism in developed countries like America, Britain, France, or Germany should be opposed but should be practised in less fortunate places that actually need it.

Reply 19

CookieButter

Original post by k.n.h.

Only the radical versions of feminism - people following feminism by wanting equality or fairness in issues that are needed are more than ok.

Radical and mainstream feminism are two sides of the same coin. They have since the 60s worked hand in hand together.

The most disgusting radical feminist books, books such as the S.C.U.M. (Society for Cutting Up Men) Manifesto, books that were banned because of the level of their terrorism and hate were only ever published in the mainstream after campaigns and support by mainstream feminism. The forward to the S.C.U.M. Manifesto is written by mainstream feminist philosopher Avital Ronell who helped publish that disgusting book that promotes rape, sexual abuse and the genocide of men. Radicalism is part of feminism. It is part of feminist theory. Radical feminist books are taught to feminists in universities as part of feminist theory without any distinction between the two. As in feminists teach radical feminism to other feminists as feminism not as radical ideas.

Radical feminism is mainstream feminism. They are intertwined. They are one and the same…let me give you a quick example of how intertwined they are. Charlotte Brunch is a "radical feminist". She is a feminist separatist. Separatism is a branch of feminism that encourages women to separate from men in society. It is as close to nazi views towards jews as feminism gets in its views towards men. She is a huge figure in the feminist world. In 1968 she organised the first ever Women's Liberation Conference attended by the top feminists of the time. She is celebrated amongst mainstream feminists as much as she is celebrated amongst radical feminists. "In 2010, the Young Feminist Task Force promoted an International Women’s Day symposium where Bunch was not only a featured speaker, but the agenda included a “Tribute to Charlotte Bunch” that included a preview of the film documentary Passionate Politics: The Life & Work of Charlotte Bunch...a movie made by feminists to celebrate her life. Mainstream feminism and radical feminism do not appose each other. They have since the 60s worked together hand in hand to impose their rotten ideology on society. They are two sides to the same coin.