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

If feminists don't want to be criticized as a single entity... watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    Not all feminists defend themselves as a single entity, so why should all feminists be criticized as though they were a single entity?

    If someone or a group of people make sweeping generalisations about themselves and others then they should be called out for doing so. There is no need to stoop to their level and do exactly the same thing.
    Oh my god, the irony. Are you really this oblivious?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Oh my god, the irony. Are you really this oblivious?
    I don't know, is there something I have missed?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I just looked at the title and laughed.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    I don't know, is there something I have missed?
    The fact you're using such a typical deflection. "Not all feminists!"... where did I address "all feminists" in my OP?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    The fact you're using such a typical deflection. "Not all feminists!"... where did I address "all feminists" in my OP?
    In the first line of your OP, which I had quoted:

    ''If feminists don't want to be criticised as a single entity, they should stop defending themselves as one.''

    Some feminists defend themselves as one, some feminists don't.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    In the first line of your OP, which I had quoted:

    ''If feminists don't want to be criticised as a single entity, they should stop defending themselves as one.''

    Some feminists defend themselves as one, some feminists don't.
    But it is still "feminists" who are defending themselves as a single entity, regardless of whether it is all of them or not. This is literally the pettiest weaselling, as usual. Can you not actually engage with the points I'm making instead of deflecting?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    But it is still "feminists" who are defending themselves as a single entity, regardless of whether it is all of them or not. This is literally the pettiest weaselling, as usual. Can you not actually engage with the points I'm making instead of deflecting?
    Fair enough, but in that case how do you know that these feminists are referring to themselves as a single entity?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    Fair enough, but in that case how do you know that these feminists are referring to themselves as a single entity?
    Because they are clearly referring to feminists as an entire group.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Because they are clearly referring to feminists as an entire group.
    How do you know that?

    If you can use the word ''feminists'' and not refer to all feminists then so can feminists, if you will.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    If you don't believe in feminism you are not a feminist.

    The definition of feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

    Key word: "equality"

    If you do not believe women should have EQUAL rights to men you are NOT a feminist.

    It's a black and white definition. To believe women are inferior to men is widely understood to be going against feminism, so why is it suddenly feminism when people believe men are inferior to women. The word is in the definition - EQUALITY.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    How do you know what?

    If you can use the word ''feminists'' and not refer to all feminists then so can feminists, if you will.
    Because it's irrelevant whether I'm referring to all feminists or not in this discussion. The point I'm making is against feminists treating feminism as a single entity. It doesn't matter how many of them do this. The argument is about the argument feminists are using. However, when feminists refer to "feminists" in the context of defending them, they're clearly defending feminists as a group, as a singular entity. If not, they would point out that "not all feminists are the same" just as they do (and you do) when defending themselves against criticisms about feminists.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by z33)
    If you don't believe in feminism you are not a feminist.

    The definition of feminism is the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.

    Key word: "equality"

    If you do not believe women should have EQUAL rights to men you are NOT a feminist.

    It's a black and white definition. To believe women are inferior to men is widely understood to be going against feminism, so why is it suddenly feminism when people believe men are inferior to women. The word is in the definition - EQUALITY.
    It's not a black and white definition, because people's concept of "equality" is not black and white. Just as I articulated in the OP. If feminism is simply about equal rights, it is superfluous, as it has no further use in this country.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Izzebie)
    Of course it's debatable about what actually makes someone a feminst
    No it isn't.

    Feminism is promoting gender equality, through ensuring women's rights are the same as mens.
    Feminism is not promoting that women should be better than men.

    That is it. There are tons of people out there who will claim to be a feminist but will believe the second view, they are not feminists. They will promote women's rights but they will try to make it so womens rights surpass mens rights.


    I believe that feminists are often considered as a group because gender equality cannot be achieved by just 1 person, being together and trying to promote change on a larger scale is what makes gender equality. There is nothing dishonest about feminists trying to promote gender equality, this dishonesty comes from people who believe what I said feminism isn't, promoting women over men.

    I believe that if you're not a feminist (by the definition of promoting gender equality) then you are a bigot because you believe that men should be above women or women should be above men.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Because it's irrelevant whether I'm referring to all feminists or not in this discussion. The point I'm making is against feminists treating feminism as a single entity. It doesn't matter how many of them do this. The argument is about the argument feminists are using. However, when feminists refer to "feminists" in the context of defending them, they're clearly defending feminists as a group, as a singular entity. If not, they would point out that "not all feminists are the same" just as they do (and you do) when defending themselves against criticisms about feminists.
    You've yet to demonstrate that these feminists are actually using this argument though.

    Just because someone hasn't said ''not all feminists'' doesn't mean they don't believe it. If anything, if we accept that ''feminists'' can mean ''some'' then they wouldn't have to.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    You've yet to demonstrate that these feminists are actually using this argument though.

    Just because someone hasn't said ''not all feminists'' doesn't mean they don't believe it. If anything, if we accept that ''feminists'' can mean ''some'' then they wouldn't have to.
    But clearly, as you have demonstrated, feminists such as yourself don't think the term "feminists" means some, so when they refer to "feminists" we can assume they mean feminists as a whole.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Craig1998)
    No it isn't.

    Feminism is promoting gender equality, through ensuring women's rights are the same as mens.
    Feminism is not promoting that women should be better than men.

    That is it. There are tons of people out there who will claim to be a feminist but will believe the second view, they are not feminists. They will promote women's rights but they will try to make it so womens rights surpass mens rights.


    I believe that feminists are often considered as a group because gender equality cannot be achieved by just 1 person, being together and trying to promote change on a larger scale is what makes gender equality. There is nothing dishonest about feminists trying to promote gender equality, this dishonesty comes from people who believe what I said feminism isn't, promoting women over men.

    I believe that if you're not a feminist (by the definition of promoting gender equality) then you are a bigot because you believe that men should be above women or women should be above men.
    It often feels like so much of what feminists say to defend themselves should come with a "*" at the end of it, and a little explanation in small print. The "feminism just means believing in equality" buzzphrase should definitely come with it. And the small print should read "*various kinds of very specific and often contradicting concepts of what equality means, typically beyond simply believing in equal rights (as those have already been achieved), and instead about influencing how people behave and think".

    I love how feminists who clearly haven't read the OP are automatically coming out with the clichés I took apart in it. So predictable.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    But clearly, as you have demonstrated, feminists such as yourself don't think the term "feminists" means some, so when they refer to "feminists" we can assume they mean feminists as a whole.
    Well no, because I am just one feminist. I have my own opinions on how best to refer to groups of people, if at all. Others may agree, others may not.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    your wrong
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SHallowvale)
    Well no, because I am just one feminist. I have my own opinions on how best to refer to groups of people, if at all. Others may agree, others may not.
    But regardless, feminists will typically come back with the "not all feminists" line. This suggests that feminists feel that one needs to make this distinction when saying "feminists" in order to understand that one isn't talking about all feminists, so we can conclude that when feminists say "feminists" without making a distinction, they mean feminists as a single group.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Atheism and feminism are completely incomparable. "Atheist" has a definitive meaning: someone who does not believe in a god. That's it, full stop. The meaning of "feminist" is not definitive, as feminists will give you different interpretations of it.
    To be fair it isn't THAT definitive. I've had many debates about whether agnostics constitute atheists or not since they don't actively believe in any deities.

    Whether atheism is active belief that something meta-physically isn't, active disbelief it is, or whether epistemic concerns come into it is an issue. But yeah, atheism is more definitive than feminist.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.