What do you think a feminist is? Watch

Namod
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#41
Report 4 years ago
#41
Someone who wants thinks man and woman are equal for example they think a woman can run faster than usain. So they want in Olympics to have men and women competing together.
0
reply
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#42
Report 4 years ago
#42
(Original post by Becca.H96)
I'm just going to put these links to emma watsons speeches on here as clearly all you un-enlightened people have no idea what feminism is.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNi9Ypc0cg8
www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-iFl4qhBsE

Please educate yourselves before making up your ideas based on the (incorrect) negative connotations that have been placed on feminism. By saying you think feminists are wrong you're basicaly saying you're sexist as you're saying you don't think women should have equal rights to men.
I think it's you that needs educating. What you need to try to understand is that feminism does not have a monopoly on the idea of gender equality. Many highly intelligent men and women deliberately exclude themselves from feminism for a variety of intelligent reasons.

Some of them exclude themselves precisely because of the kind of Sovietesque, bullying tone feminists like you give off - 'if you aren't a member of this group you are a sexist'.

Some of them exclude themselves because they subscribe to a specific kind of gender equality that they do not feel is represented by the feminist movement. Many people believe in equality of opportunity between the genders, and feel that feminism very often strives for equality of outcome, such as in campaigns for an enforced equality of men and women in contexts like jobs and pay, when in fact such an 'equality' is in effect actually an inequality when numbers of men and women applying, circumstances, natural ability and hours worked are taken into account.

Some of them exclude themselves because they feel embarrassed and uncomfortable by a movement that seeks to forcibly erode the liberty of individuals to listen to songs like 'Blurred Lines' or for magazines to give a platform for women to voluntarily sell their bodies for money, especially when these campaigns are prioritised over much more serious issues like FGM. To these people, the pettiness and intolerance for individual liberty that the movement evokes defines it as an intolerant club for girls and women with the mental age of girls to join for a sense of community and the thrill of being part of something bigger for the sake of it.

Some of them feel that feminism is categorically not a movement for gender equality because it focuses on a massively disproportionate scale on the issues of women, often as petty and intolerant as the previous examples, while almost entirely ignoring the issues of men such as custody laws, divorce laws and the massively higher male suicide rate. These people feel that the movement is masquerading as a movement for gender equality for political expedience, but is not and often has no intention of actually living up to this definition.

All in all, it is quite obvious that you don't have to identify as a feminist to believe in a sensible form of gender equality, and I am frankly absolutely sick of twits telling me and others that we are 'sexists' for not slapping on ourselves the same label that you do.

Shouting a lot, joining lots of feminist facebook groups, going on lots of feminist protests and wearing a This is what a feminist looks like t-shirt does not automatically qualify you as someone who believes in some objective form of gender equality, and not doing so does not automatically disqualify you. It is the individual views that define someone's position. Needing to be part of a tribe and accusing anyone who disagrees with you as 'unenlightened' only hints that you are insecure in your own ability to form intelligent positions independently.
4
reply
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#43
Report 4 years ago
#43
(Original post by TurboCretin)
I have no formal expertise on the issue, but these are my thoughts.

A fundamental issue with feminism, I think, is that there is no single authority on what it constitutes. We have dictionary definitions of what the term means, but those are intended to do nothing more than reflect, at the highest level of generality, the beliefs of people who describe themselves as such. As a result of the movement's democratic nature, it has fragmented - telling someone that you are a feminist allows them to assume very little about what you stand for. This is the really fundamental problem which the thread title addresses, and this is reflected in more concrete terms in a number of ways.

I think that feminism's public image has suffered from it becoming an occupation and an industry. Being a feminist academic, for example, became a thing, and people began publishing books and articles on high feminist theory. At that point, many of the best platforms for spreading the feminist message began to be found among the ivory towers and ordinary people lost patience with the academic concerns of this vocal minority. There's an additional vocal minority group, as there is in any large movement (generally known as "fringe crazies") who latch on to the ideas and twist them to suit their own motives. It is a sad fact of life that the people with the most extreme positions in a given movement happen to expend an inordinate amount of energy on pushing their agenda compared to the vast bulk of moderates. It's widely acknowledged that this group has done a fair amount of damage to feminism's PR.

A third issue, and one which I think is closer to the mainstream, is the slant which feminist charities have on the idea of gender equality. You read things in mission statements about achieving gender equality, yet the problems which these charities focus upon are, in every case I've seen, predominantly if not exclusively female-centric. Often the slant is phrased explicitly in mission statements, in terms such as 'achieving equality for women'. That makes absolutely no sense, as a phrase. Gender equality is not a see-saw. It concerns a vast array of complex issues such as pay, workplace composition, parental rights, divorce laws, body image, sexual crimes and so on. Furthermore, within many of these areas men and women are both disadvantaged in qualitatively different ways, so thinking about gender equality from a 'see-saw' point of view is fundamentally flawed.

Thinking about the issues in this 'quantitative' rather than qualitative manner also legitimises sweeping men's problems under the carpet, because they are not viewed as significant in comparison with those experienced by women. I am not arguing that women don't have the worse deal, but that fact does not mean that male-specific issues are insignificant. Boys and men are achieving less highly in school, are graduating university in fewer numbers, are worse off financially in young professional life than women, die younger, are prejudiced against in the family courts, and, in delicious irony, are very often told to be quiet and man up when they speak about these problems. As we all know, the suicide rate for men is three and a half times that of women. This doesn't strike me as an insignificant issue.

To answer your question, the term 'feminism' has become fairly meaningless to me. I am an avid supporter of gender equality. I don't think that the need for gender equality is a contentious issue. I do feel uncomfortable, though, associating myself with a movement of which nobody really has the reins. It just results in assumptions, crossed wires and bickering. I would much rather engage with people on the substantive issues.
An outstanding post.
0
reply
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#44
Report 4 years ago
#44
(Original post by Birkenhead)
I think it's you that needs educating. What you need to try to understand is that feminism does not have a monopoly on the idea of gender equality. Many highly intelligent men and women deliberately exclude themselves from feminism for a variety of intelligent reasons.

Some of them exclude themselves precisely because of the kind of Sovietesque, bullying tone feminists like you give off - 'if you aren't a member of this group you are a sexist'.

Some of them exclude themselves because they subscribe to a specific kind of gender equality that they do not feel is represented by the feminist movement. Many people believe in equality of opportunity between the genders, and feel that feminism very often strives for equality of outcome, such as in campaigns for an enforced equality of men and women in contexts like jobs and pay, when in fact such an 'equality' is in effect actually an inequality when numbers of men and women applying, circumstances, natural ability and hours worked are taken into account.

Some of them exclude themselves because they feel embarrassed and uncomfortable by a movement that seeks to forcibly erode the liberty of individuals to listen to songs like 'Blurred Lines' or for magazines to give a platform for women to voluntarily sell their bodies for money, especially when these campaigns are prioritised over much more serious issues like FGM. To these people, the pettiness and intolerance for individual liberty that the movement evokes defines it as an intolerant club for girls and women with the mental age of girls to join for a sense of community and the thrill of being part of something bigger for the sake of it.

Some of them feel that feminism is categorically not a movement for gender equality because it focuses on a massively disproportionate scale on the issues of women, often as petty and intolerant as the previous examples, while almost entirely ignoring the issues of men such as custody laws, divorce laws and the massively higher male suicide rate. These people feel that the movement is masquerading as a movement for gender equality for political experience, but is not and often has no intention of actually living up to this definition.

All in all, it is quite obvious that you don't have to identify as a feminist to believe in a sensible form of gender equality, and I am frankly absolutely sick of twits telling me and others that we are 'sexists' for not slapping on ourselves the same label that you do.

Shouting a lot, joining lots of feminist facebook groups, going on lots of feminist protests and wearing a This is what a feminist looks like t-shirt does not automatically qualify you as someone who believes in some objective form of gender equality, and not doing so does not automatically disqualify you. It is the individual views that define someone's position. Needing to be part of a tribe and accusing anyone who disagrees with you is 'unenlightened' only hints that you are insecure in your own ability to form intelligent positions independently.
This is a little insulting Birk. If it weren't for feminism women wouldn't have the right to vote.
I became a feminist after hearing of the Santa Barbara shootings, and seeing a wave of Rodger sympathetics claiming that if girls had just given him a chance nobody would have died. Because of course, a man goes around shooting people and it becomes the fault of women.
There is the fact that there are many men that feel entitled and superior to women, even though one could argue that politically women are equal to men, socially I feel the case is different, there is a rape culture for example. Men gawping at nudes that had been leaked but slut shaming at naked photo shoots taken completely consensually.
0
reply
Josb
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#45
Report 4 years ago
#45
(Original post by James Milibanter)
There is the fact that there are many men that feel entitled and superior to women, even though one could argue that politically women are equal to men, socially I feel the case is different, there is a rape culture for example. Men gawping at nudes that had been leaked but slut shaming at naked photo shoots taken completely consensually.
Are you serious?
0
reply
Birkenhead
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#46
Report 4 years ago
#46
(Original post by James Milibanter)
This is a little insulting Birk. If it weren't for feminism women wouldn't have the right to vote.
Wrong. The suffragettes were not feminists.

I became a feminist after hearing of the Santa Barbara shootings, and seeing a wave of Rodger sympathetics claiming that if girls had just given him a chance nobody would have died. Because of course, a man goes around shooting people and it becomes the fault of women.
Let me get this straight. You became a feminist because of the views of one clearly extremely mentally unstable person and a small number of bitter internet dwellers, trolls and sexually frustrated 14-year-old boys? Doesn't strike me as a particularly sound basis for allying yourself to an entire political movement.

There is the fact that there are many men that feel entitled and superior to women
I'm sure there are many women that feel the inverse. This is also a completely invalid reason to call yourself a feminist.

there is a rape culture for example.
I don't agree that there is a 'rape culture'. I think the idea that pop songs can induce men to rape is frankly ridiculous.

Men gawping at nudes that had been leaked but slut shaming at naked photo shoots taken completely consensually.
I see no evidence for this. If I did, I would not see why it should point anyone to baptising themselves as 'feminists'.
0
reply
Josb
Badges: 6
Rep:
?
#47
Report 4 years ago
#47
(Original post by artismight)
Feminists should just be woman who militate for EQUAL rights in the world for man and woman, which isn't the case in our days, for the equal rights and the definition of a feminist. I mean, some feminists ( that's my opinion ) become sexist in a way and too much aggressive, and lose any credibility in proclaiming always their superiority against man, and I think that it's too bad because at the beginning it was a noble cause. Furthermore their way of action ( once again that's my opinion ) should be appropriate, there is so many sector where woman aren't as equally considered as men, that some action are for me totally ridiculous. For instance in France, a group of feminist in 2012 have rebelled against the different appellations that existed for woman ( Madame, Mademoiselle ) and just 1 for Men ( Monsieur ). As a result of all of this the " Mademoiselle" has been cancelled by the prime minister himself , seriously I thought " What a waste of their time ^^
The same year, there were trials for several massive collective rapes (underage girls raped by hundreds of men), which happened in some basements of the Parisian suburbs, but I didn't hear these feminists on that case. The defendants were all of African descent, and were sentenced to six months of prison. The minister for women's rights didn't say a word.
0
reply
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#48
Report 4 years ago
#48
(Original post by Birkenhead)
Wrong. The suffragettes were not feminists.



Let me get this straight. You became a feminist because of the views of one clearly extremely mentally unstable person and a small number of bitter internet dwellers, trolls and sexually frustrated 14-year-old boys? Doesn't strike me as a particularly sound basis for allying yourself to an entire political movement.



I'm sure there are many women that feel the inverse. This is also a completely invalid reason to call yourself a feminist.



I don't agree that there is a 'rape culture'. I think the idea that pop songs can induce men to rape is frankly ridiculous.



I see no evidence for this. If I did, I would not see why it should point anyone to baptising themselves as 'feminists'.
Well that's because feminism didn't exist in the early 20th century

It's more of a social movement and yes it took 14 year olds, trolls and one mentally ill, sexually frustrated, self entitled mass murderer for me to come to my senses. There's a lack of equality between men and women and it's plain to see. When has a man been "given away" at a wedding? When has a man ever felt the need to say "this empowers me"?

Well, there has been a direct correlation between the rise of feminism in the UK and the amount of men going abroad to wed women from more stereotypically "submissive" cultures. (e.g. Thailand)

Well you may find it ridiculous but especially with modern teen novels and adult fiction (most of it is due to bad writing) there is a problematic romantification of absolutely everything. In 50 shades, Christian on a multitude of occasions was ignoring safewords, and ignoring consent, romantifying rape. It leads to a "no can sometimes mean yes" mentality which blurs the line between consent and rape. What really gets to me though, about teen romance novels and films and such, is that even the most horrid guys, whether they are extremely socially inept or just massive dicks, are still having girls fall at their feet. It breeds Elliot Rodger types whom think that just because they're male they somehow have a right to a relationship, and a right to sex. And considering that rape is a much bigger problem for women than men, does signify a need for feminism.

This subtle objectification of women is seen everywhere, rappers claiming to have sex with at least 7 women per song, having 20 songs on an album, 140 women per album, and then you get kids looking at these guys in admiration, both guys and girls. This constant speak of the friendzone and whatnot also, self entitled guys complaining about an inability to turn a girl on.

Look, you don't have to call yourself a feminist, but if you too see these, indeed subtle, forms of Patriarchy within our current society, and you believe that they are wrong, then you're a good egg in my book.
0
reply
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#49
Report 4 years ago
#49
(Original post by Josb)
Are you serious?
Yes, why would I troll?
0
reply
Wfarz
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#50
Report 4 years ago
#50
I think people can are reluctant to label themselevs a feminist due to it having so many different interpretations. A woman that protests topless infront of places of worship might label herself a feminist. A woman who believes that men are responsible for all of the problems that women face could call herself a feminist. Someone who simply believes that women and men should be equal could say they are a feminist.
Feminism has turned into something it wasn't meant to be at first, basically radicalised (not feminism as a whole but by some) and i guess many don't want to associalte themselves with that, idk...
0
reply
drowzee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#51
Report 4 years ago
#51
(Original post by Wade-)
I think our agreement goes about as far as thinking that girl is an idiot lol


Posted from TSR Mobile
Well that was the only thing I was agreeing to. The other part was for the OP lol.
0
reply
TurboCretin
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#52
Report 4 years ago
#52
(Original post by capachino)
without feminists
women wouldnt work , vote , drive ,
and would live only to be good wifes and to devote all of their time to their husband who they look at as more important and superior to themselfs
how many women would want to live in that world

people who complain - you dont understand the defference between regular feminist(majority) and RADICAL feminst
you put them in the same bracket and breathe hatred towards anyone more informed than you who calls themselfs a regular feminist , its ignorant and unhealthy

why dont you educate yourselfs , also on the media and how they use "feminist" in articles half the time only to get commenters cos they know its something people love hating on , they only say what you want to hear to benifit them ,so you are uninformed
I think this is a good example of the definition problem I wrote about above. What is a feminist? Is it someone who calls themselves a feminist, or someone who advocates for gender equality? Was Plato a feminist?

It's an important question, because the movement for women's suffrage began before the term 'feminism' was ever used in this context. Women's trade unions also existed and were campaigning for equal pay. Other groups were campaigning for more rights for women upon divorce. All before the term was ever even used in a political context (it did exist before, but just meant 'femininity'). So either you need to concede that these people were not feminists (if being a feminist means calling yourself one), or you need to concede that it is possible not be a feminist even if you call yourself one (if being a feminist means advocating for gender equality).

If we assume that being a feminist is about principles rather than labels, who gets to decide what those principles are? Different people think that gender equality requires different things in different cases, so when two of these people argue is one a feminist and the other not? Or are they both feminists and the movement simply doesn't have a coherent position? Without a Feminist Theory of Everything, or a Grand High Feminist to act as the ultimate arbiter of the feminist position, who are you or I to decide whose views are radical?
0
reply
RandZul'Zorander
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#53
Report 4 years ago
#53
(Original post by TurboCretin)
I think this is a good example of the definition problem I wrote about above. What is a feminist? Is it someone who calls themselves a feminist, or someone who advocates for gender equality? Was Plato a feminist?

It's an important question, because the movement for women's suffrage began before the term 'feminism' was ever used in this context. Women's trade unions also existed and were campaigning for equal pay. Other groups were campaigning for more rights for women upon divorce. All before the term was ever even used in a political context (it did exist before, but just meant 'femininity'). So either you need to concede that these people were not feminists (if being a feminist means calling yourself one), or you need to concede that it is possible not be a feminist even if you call yourself one (if being a feminist means advocating for gender equality).

If we assume that being a feminist is about principles rather than labels, who gets to decide what those principles are? Different people think that gender equality requires different things in different cases, so when two of these people argue is one a feminist and the other not? Or are they both feminists and the movement simply doesn't have a coherent position? Without a Feminist Theory of Everything, or a Grand High Feminist to act as the ultimate arbiter of the feminist position, who are you or I to decide whose views are radical?
I think it is closer to talking about principles. The principle is that of equality of the genders. Now, like you said what that means and entails differs for different people, and so there can be many different viewpoints within the group of self-identifying feminists. As such the feminist movement has many different sub groups. Feminism is like any ideology. There is an overarching theme but there can be different 'sects' which take a different approach to that theme. Are some not 'true feminists'? I don't think of it that way. They are all feminists but with different perspectives.

That is why generally many people are said to be feminists in history even though they didn't personally use that label (often because the label wasn't available at the time). The same could be applied for any ideology though, even modern identities. The question is do we believe that the label is describing something objectively identifiable or is it culturally and/or temporally limited? I would go with the former.
0
reply
Spetznaaz
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#54
Report 4 years ago
#54
(Original post by amysvz)
It doesn't seem reasonable to assume the responses of all feminists to be the same. By creating such generalisations aren't you just reflecting the very same sort of simplistic and blinkered behaviour/world view that you accuse the 'feminist' of having? It seems a sad irony which merely polarises the debate further and perpetuates our inability to have an open and logical discussion!
Yes obviously not every feminist is the same, this being said however, in order to be a feminist you must surely have fundamental beliefs.

Find me a feminist who does not believe women are oppressed in the first world, does not believe women are paid less simply for being women, does not play the women are victims card and accepts that men and women are very different on both a physical and psychological level.

If you found one, i'd then have to ask, why are they a feminist? Maybe they would say it's about oppression in third world ****holes, to which i would respond, what about the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of men who are victims of oppression in these countries?
0
reply
limetang
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#55
Report 4 years ago
#55
(Original post by capachino)
without feminists
women wouldnt work , vote , drive , and would live only to be good wifes and to devote all of their time to their husband who they look at as more important and superior to themselfs
how many women would want to live in that world

people who complain - you dont understand the defference between regular feminist(majority) and RADICAL feminst
you put them in the same bracket and breathe hatred towards anyone more informed than you who calls themselfs a regular feminist , its ignorant and unhealthy

why dont you educate yourselfs , also on the media and how they use "feminist" in articles half the time only to get commenters cos they know its something people love hating on , they only say what you want to hear to benifit them ,so you are uninformed
Feminism and feminists came about in the 1960's. Women were working, voting and driving by then.
0
reply
dyslexicvegie
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#56
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#56
(Original post by limetang)
Feminism and feminists came about in the 1960's. Women were working, voting and driving by then.
Also in the 6os women could be legally raped by there husband (that little gem wasn't a crime till 1997).
Could be forced to leave there job when they got marred.Marred women who did work were vilified as bad mothers.
Abortion wasn't legal till 67. ( and only married women could get the pill)
There are so many other things ....

The sex discrimination and equal pay acts were in the 1970s!!!!!!
0
reply
limetang
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#57
Report 4 years ago
#57
(Original post by dyslexicvegie)
Also in the 6os women could be legally raped by there husband (that little gem wasn't a crime till 1997).
Could be forced to leave there job when they got marred.Marred women who did work were vilified as bad mothers.
Abortion wasn't legal till 67. ( and only married women could get the pill)
There are so many other things ....

The sex discrimination and equal pay acts were in the 1970s!!!!!!
I feel you've completely missed my point, in that I was saying that things like the right to vote didn't come about as a result of feminism.
0
reply
Snagprophet
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#58
Report 4 years ago
#58
Apparently someone who thinks clapping is triggering and thus jazz hands are required.
0
reply
rad_student
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#59
Report 4 years ago
#59
(Original post by dyslexicvegie)
Also in the 6os women could be legally raped by there husband (that little gem wasn't a crime till 1997).
Could be forced to leave there job when they got marred.Marred women who did work were vilified as bad mothers.
Abortion wasn't legal till 67. ( and only married women could get the pill)
There are so many other things ....

The sex discrimination and equal pay acts were in the 1970s!!!!!!
Can women legally rape their husbands? Or any 16+ male? What year will that be a crime in?

Lots of women worked part time, it was career women that got a bad I wonder when maternity pay came about, as businesses may not have been able to pay if they had to pay for finding & hiring a replacement.
http://www.sirc.org/publik/CFOM.pdf P5 & 6: 1951 17% of women worked. Lower probably due to less mod cons & 1 pay was enough for a family (true till the 1980s).

http://www.angryharry.com/esTheSexua...ionofWomen.htm Some info on the Pill & attitude from a person who was alive at the time. The pill liberated men as well as women.

Equal Pay Act was important, as there could be a male & female rate for the same job's pay grade.
0
reply
sacca
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#60
Report 4 years ago
#60
(Original post by rad_student)
Can women legally rape their husbands? Or any 16+ male? What year will that be a crime in?

Lots of women worked part time, it was career women that got a bad I wonder when maternity pay came about, as businesses may not have been able to pay if they had to pay for finding & hiring a replacement.
http://www.sirc.org/publik/CFOM.pdf P5 & 6: 1951 17% of women worked. Lower probably due to less mod cons & 1 pay was enough for a family (true till the 1980s).

http://www.angryharry.com/esTheSexua...ionofWomen.htm Some info on the Pill & attitude from a person who was alive at the time. The pill liberated men as well as women.

Equal Pay Act was important, as there could be a male & female rate for the same job's pay grade.
women can't rape men as rape require penetration, also women are oppressed by men so the real story is that not some odd man getting raped here and there it isn't a big deal in the big picture.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (65)
23.3%
No (214)
76.7%

Watched Threads

View All