Of course feminism is female focused, just like the gay rights movement is LGBT focused. Historically and even now, women have been and are still in the inferior position when it comes to the issues I mentioned in my previous argument (political economic etc). Men have just as important a place in feminism as women. But it's unreasonable to think that equal time would be devoted to talking about men and women when there is so, so much more about women that needs to be addressed now.(Original post by Sanctimonious)
I'm against movements that support self segregation that fundamentally undermine the true belief system of the cause they are fighting for.
I support movement promoting equality for all with no favourable agenda from the outset.
If feminism is fighting on behalf of women and men, why is it called feminism? Were the NAACP fighting for the advancement of white people then? No and they never pretended they were. They were fighting for the advancement of coloured people which is actually part of the name.
If feminism was named the equality and anti patriarchal movement then a lot more men would get behind it but as it is so female focused with little regard in fact for men a lot of men couldn't give a ****. Funnily enough I know women who won't support it either due it being so female focused from the onset.
Don't let prejudiced feminists stop you from looking into and exploring feminist issues and learning about the movement and its aims. I used to think that, in the end, feminists are man-haters who want the privileges of men in society without the responsibilities. But there's so much more to feminism than you think.
Once again, feminism works against the patriarchy by giving women equal standing to men. It's the women who are oppressed in the patriarchy. Not men and women. That's why it's called feminism.
Feminism is to Misandry what Socialism is to Communism Watch
Last edited by Pasta6163; 23-07-2014 at 20:35. Reason: Clarification
- 23-07-2014 20:25
- 23-07-2014 20:27
Also, before I discuss more here, I'd like to say that while I identify as a feminist, I do not speak on behalf of the movement. These are just my views
(Original post by Sanctimonious)
- 23-07-2014 20:40
The Oxford Dictionary definition is massively outdated and may be applicable to feminism back in the day. The modern movement of feminism within western societies is fundamentally and intrinsically different from feminist roots.(Original post by Sanctimonious)
I'm not talking about people. I'm talking about the movement as a whole as opposed to individuals who as you state later blur the divide between misandry, feminism and equality. This is no different from politically motivated people who blur the line between communism, socialism and centrist. If you were to use a Venn Diagram for illustration purposes you'd have some overlap between the three groups but socialism would not be a subset of centrism in the same way feminism would not be a subset of pure equality. Feminism cannot be a subset of pure equality because it is purely female focused and driven as opposed to being multi gender focused. The current myth is that feminism is a branch pushing towards pure equality and whilst it is closer to equality than misandry and whilst many feminists do fall in between the union of feminism and equality it is ridiculous to suggest it is the equivalent of pure equality.
Socialism would not be a subset of centrism as the two cover very different things. Socialism deals with economics while centrism deals with social equality and hierarchy. To contrast, both pure equality and feminism/meninism deal with equality, so it is easier to say that feminism is a subset of pure equality.
Coupled with meninism, feminism goes towards forming ''pure equality''. I am not saying that feminism is the equivalent of pure equality.(Original post by Sanctimonious)
And as already stated above modern day feminism is world's apart from the aims of the true roots of feminist women.
You're in effect trying to say that feminism is a subset of pure equality and whilst many feminists do fall in that grey area that wouldn't make them pure equality seekers either and yes many men are guilty of that too on the other side of things but with men there is no middle ground established thus they're either misogynists or equal rights seekers when many fall in between and have male dominated attitudes that are equal to feminism, difference is there is no label for it.
- Thread Starter
- 23-07-2014 20:52
- 23-07-2014 20:55
I find it strange yet telling how the term "meninism" is used in this thread, rather than what would be considered the equivalent term "masculinism". I think it shows how much men vs women, male vs female influences the non-feminists (EDIT: here) have when it comes to the feminist issue.
I'm just pointing that out, it's not an argument. Feminism definitely isn't about femininity!Last edited by Pasta6163; 23-07-2014 at 20:56. Reason: Clarification
(Original post by anarchism101)
- 23-07-2014 21:47
No it doesn't. It says "No More Page 3", which is not quite the same thing. Undoubtedly there are some women within that movement which do support an enforced ban, but from what I've seen it seems to be mostly aimed towards pressuring The Sun to end Page 3 of its own accord, rather than pressuring the government into introducing a ban.