Turn on thread page Beta

Why I hate "feminism"- as a woman. watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Bet I'm going to get a lot of viewers with that provocative title :teehee:
    Disclaimer No.1: Ladies, please hold your estrogen/prolactin hormones to a normal level until you finish reading my thread. Gents, please also hold your testosterone to a normal level until you finish reading my thread. Thank you :cute:
    Disclaimer No.2: This post is meant to challenge feminism- the ideology, and the movements (or mini-ideologies) within it. I am not against feminism as a whole in the same way as I am not in favour of it. I also encourage you to challenge my arguments, come up with your own in favour/against Feminism in order to make this post a debate and not a *****ing arena.
    Disclaimer No. 3: For those of you thinking that I have too much time on my hands to write this, I'm letting you know that debating over any ideology is part of my degree- so I'm actually being productive now xD

    I decided to write this just after coming from a seminar on "Feminism", and will start by saying that I don't hate "feminism" because of what it implies, I hate it because even after reading from so many books about this ideology, I am still not sure if I am a "feminist" or not (*)

    I also hate "feminism" because to the average person -regardless whether man or woman- not studying politics/IR/other social study or not reading about the ideology, feminism is still perceived as only being radical feminism.I met women that claimed that they wanted equality (which is what mostly liberal feminism is concerned with) but they didn't want feminism because they thought that all feminists are angry men-hating women, which is not by any means true.


    I also hate "feminism" because it just feels like all the ideologies this world currently has are compressed and divided from a single gendered perspective.

    1)You have liberal feminists: their proponents claim that the single and most important goal for women's liberation is sexual equality or gender justice

    2)You have socialist-marxist feminism: their proponents mostly attack the existing divisions of labour in society that made women primarily responsible for domestic duties. Just like Socialists-Marxists, they're also seeking the need for a revolution to overthrow capitalism, but also to overcome male dominance.

    3)You have radical-feminism (my personal least-favourite one):
    These people (mostly women) are virtually nuts.
    a) A lady called Shulamith Firestone claims that male power and control over women's biology can only be abolished by relieving women of their reproductive role.She's basically suggesting that us women shouldn't be mommas and that we should make babies in a tube. No thanks, I'm personally looking forward to feel some kicks in my tummy in the next decade or so.
    b) A lady called Mary Daly, who's really into ladies (if you know what I mean :sexface:)claims that women should create a culture separate from men. She, just like other radical feminists criticises liberal feminism for never questioning whether masculine and/or feminine traits are worth keeping.

    There are many other types of "feminism" but I won't go into them as this is not the point of my thread.

    (*) coming back to the idea I underlined earlier. I am still having a hard time deciding if I am a "feminist" or not, because of these disparaties I just mentioned. Every type of feminist movement is only concerned with one apparent problem. I can't consider myself any of them, because some are endorsing a number of ideas to which I agree, but they may be overlooking some that I also consider to be a problem. Some might have some ideas to which I agree, but they also have some ideas to which I am highly against. So, until I'll make up my mind whether I am or not a "feminist" per se, I will keep anything related to the word/ideology "feminism" in quotation marks (because I am still questioning and challenging the ideology).

    I'll now ennumerate the problems I see with "feminism" so far, and I will engulf all waves and movements in this summation:

    So far all movements of "feminism" that I reviewed raise the issue of inequality between the sexes. However, "feminists" such as radicals for instance, raise discrimination from men as an issue but at the same time discriminate other women. They're accusing women working in modelling or in the porn industry for doing what they are doing, but in reality it's their choice, and they are getting paid for what they're doing. They are shoving "objectification" as an issue whenever they're looking at magazines such as FHM, PlayBoy, Sports Illustrated, etc., but men are also at risk to have lower self esteem whenever they're looking at magazines with buff gym guys (most of whom take steroids and take other unorthodox methods to achieve that look). Does that mean women are more sensible to these adverts, hence should be pitied more and that men can deal with it because they've got an extra load of meat in their crotch? Sorry, but that's bs.

    This issue over the "ideal look" projected by the media and other companies is an issue for both sexes, therefore I don't see this as a legit pretext to be used by some feminists. Anorexia/plastic surgery resulting from what some girls see in the media is an equally severe problem to the one some men are having when they're injecting steroids into their bodies, as a result of what they're also seeing in the media.

    I also hate the idea of work quotas. In some parts of the world there is a certain number of positions allocated for women only, that companies must have. I see this as a response to "gender discrimination" by gender discrimination. I am sorry to say this, ladies, but we are not physically constructed by mother nature to fulfil some tasks. However, that doesn't mean that women shouldn't have access to all types of jobs, god forbid, but I believe that both men and women should first be tested for their skills and then be employed. Probation periods are a good example. If an applicant of either gender proves not to be fit for the job, that's the result of their capabilities. Women can work in the army, women can work in construction, women can do jobs that also men can do, but not all. This goes vice-versa.
    Of course there is still gender discrimination going on in the working environment, and of course some women are being paid less than some men for the same job, but men are not the only ones to blame for this. Gender inequality is a socially constructed concept and I think that the best way to respond to this is to not see a human being in terms of gender, at least when it comes to the work environment. When an employer looks at a prospective employee, he/she should see only the employee and what he/she must to for the job and not a man employee or a woman employee. If I was an employer and I had my company I would put a big sign in front of my office saying "I don't see gender in my employees; if you prove yourself fit for the job, you'll get it, and your pay is based on what you are assigned to do" (I would also add a small disclaimer saying "if you don't get accepted and you're shoving patriarchy/racism/atheism/homophobia in my face for that, gtfo).

    The lecturer I had for Feminism (who was a man) showed us some statistics with how many women are employed in some jobs, but a colleague of mine (who was a girl) asked a very good question- does that statistic show how many women actually applied for the jobs?

    Both men and women are discriminating women when it comes to gender inequality, because people from both sides have "absorbed" this concept in their day to day lives, either consciously or unconsciously. Men are supposedly treating/ regarding women as "a piece of meat", but some women often use the phrase "Am I (or is she) just a piece of meat to you?" to their partners/ other men. As a woman, you are basically using this argument against you and your own gender, whether you're acknowledging or not. Same goes for some blacks, whenever one says "Oh, you think that's (=usually a bad thing) because I am black?". Sorry, but to me you are directly implying that blacks are bad, simply by saying that. This example can be merged to many other situations, but my post is long so please forgive my apparent bias- tis unintentional.



    I was recently provoked by what appeared to be a radical feminist after she heard I was wearing a corset whenever I'm sitting at my desk/sleeping. She blamed me for "torturing myself" to achieve some ideal female standards that she was blabbering about. Of course that corset offers me an hourglass figure (with which I was in fact born- thanks momma) but my main use of the corset is to redress my position, because I have some pretty bad scoliosis. Of course, I would also sound like a hypocrite to say that that's the only reason why I'm wearing one. I decided to buy a corset for that health reason, but I'm also enjoying the fact that it keeps (and mildly accentuates) my hourglass figure. Our bodies are a living canvas, and we're biologically constructed to have a certain shape, colour, and height. Being happy with/taking advantage of mother nature gave us is not a bad thing- of course exceptions apply, but each of us have our own standards of what is decent/indecent. For instance, I saw myself disliking some girls that were wearing shorts shorter than my boxers, but at the same time I was wearing a V neck top that was mildly accentuating my cleavage. "Decency" is another heated debate topic - among both sexes- and my post is already getting pretty damn long so I will only use this concept to challenge another "feminist" argument sexism. Although I already challenged this argument in what I said earlier, I will address some other examples of things considered to be sexist:

    One time I was talking on the phone with my ex and at some point (after teasing him) he said "shut up and go to the kictchen where you belong". I laughed so hard because I was actually in the kitchen stirring in my porridge. Personally, as a woman, I don't feel offended by this. I feel that I "belong in the kitchen" because I like cooking, but so does dad- he's a chef (that's why when he teases me I also ask him to go to the kitchen and make mum and me dinner xD)

    If she slept with more guys she's a ****, if he slept with more girls he's a legend.
    (Then there's the Taylor Swift saga of songs in which she's *****ing about all her exes for being players.)

    In my view, the expression above doesn't make either side more appealing to me. I personally wouldn't sleep with "a legend/player" etc. However, the fact that I'm into guys looking for a stable/committed relationship doesn't make me any more of a saint than a girl who's into having casual sex. It's a matter of preference. The idea is that we both know (or should know) what to expect when we're approaching some guys, in the same way that guys know (or should know) what to expect when they're approaching some girls.

    I was once at the beach playing volleyball with some friends and I hugged a guy from my team for saving the ball when I missed it. When I hugged him he got a boner and my gal friend snapped at him saying "she's taken, you jerk". Including the fact that that guys can get boners in plenty other embarrasing/not embarrasing situations, feeling aroused or attracted when you're seeing a girl showing more of her body is not your fault. That's your body's signal of saying that it wants some special time ( :hubba:), whether you listen to it and "take action" or not, that's a different story.


    This also reminded me of the "free the nipple campaign", and how people (particularly women) are aiming to allow women to walk topless/ be shown topeless in some circumstances.

    I see nothing wrong with this, but they should not disregard the fact that both men and women find boobs more arousing than moobs (a.k.a. man boobs- sorry guys :sad:). It is normal. It is natural. Men love lady breasts, and so do women, or at least some women (including myself :sexface:). Lady breasts, big or small, round or oval, pink nippled or dark nippled are a sign of fertility, and it is instinctual for men to enjoy seeing them.
    I personally wouldn't show my breasts out in the public, because I consider them to be something I would only show to my lucky man (:hubba:) but if any other woman decides to show it, that's fine by me. However, and now I'm referring to the last argument that I will challenge: "she asked for it", women shouldn't be surprised if they arise attention from men by exposing some parts of their body, and this includes the rest of the female body, not just the boobies. Again, it is instinctual for men to enjoy breasts, seeing some bum bum or whatever else gets them excited. Vice versa for us ladies. If I see a guy's naked back, and he has a bit of definition to it, I find it hard to still have courtesy :sexface:. Whether we like it or not, during puberty our body gets moulded into a sex machine, it is programmed to do so, because our species relies on it. By young adulthood our body is expecting to give it some lovin from somebody else, and it is natural. How we show our interest to our potential sex partners is a different issue. And here comes the issue of rape, and I'll intertwine it with the "she asked for it" issue. Rape is a very unfortunate, disgusting, dreadful crime. So is stealing from and afterwards killing a person. So is paedophilia. And these are just a handful of examples. Why do these crimes happen? A criminal would usually aggress a person who would fits his/her criteria. A male rapist would most likely attack a female, should he be heterosexual. A female heterosexual rapist would attack a man. Homosexual rapists of either gender would attack people of their own gender. In a criminal's eye the victim is "an easy", helpless target, regardless whether the victim is a he or a she. So is a child in the eyes of a paedophiliac, and moreover- paedophiliacs don't only assault children because "they're easy", but also because they're mentally really into kids. A robber would most likely attack an older person, because they're less likely to fight back/run to them. A wolf would only attack a prey that's weak, either old, young or sick.
    Nobody is ever asking to be assaulted in any way. A male heterosexual rapist, if "in the mood", will attack a woman/girl, regardless whether she's wearing a bikini or she's covered from head to toe.

    It is true that women are more prone to being raped because there are more heterosexual rapists out there than any other type, but I believe that rape, just like any other crime, should be unacceptable for either gender. Men that are raped are often ashamed to speak out, primarily because they think that by doing so they're losing their manlihood.As far as the victims are concerned, being raped doesn't make you any more of a woman (= weak) than it makes you any less of a man(=weak).


    This is a very long post that addresses only a handful of problems regarding "feminism"- both what it implies and how it is perceived by people of either sexes nowadays. As I mentioned in my second disclaimer, I invite you all who read and feel like they want to share their thoughts to do it; feel free to write pro-contra arguments of what I said, challenge the ideology by giving further examples and also say what's good with feminism and what should be kept. Thank you :cute:

    Here's a link to make you smile after so much reading. Please feel free to watch the link before commenting, as it will melt your hearts and release good neurotransmitters in your brains. That way I'll be dealing with less rage from the ones who felt angered by what I said. Consider it a benefit for both you and I xD.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I hate feminism so I'll probably agree with everything you've written, but nobody on here is reading all that. Cut it down.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Marry me? :puppyeyes:
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Nobody is going to read all that, sorry. I don't blame them. Read it through yourself again and exercise your writing skills; aka keep it concise!
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    TL;DR

    Repped anyway, probably a good read.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Be succinct. Not reading all of that.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Viva Emptiness)
    Classic!
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    A TL;DR Plz
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    You're having a laff if you think we're going to read that.

    And sorry hun, that wasn't my oestrogen speaking. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    Be succinct. Not reading all of that.
    Do you really think it will be something original, something that we haven't seen before (again and again) on this forum?


    It'll be the same old rubbish, leading to the same old tedious arguments.

    I'm bored.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    i didn't read it but i'll probably agree with it...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Viva Emptiness)
    x
    (Original post by Mr Smurf)
    Marry me? :puppyeyes:
    (Original post by NeverTooLatte)
    Nobody is going to read all that, sorry. I don't blame them. Read it through yourself again and exercise your writing skills; aka keep it concise!
    (Original post by iAmanze)
    TL;DR

    Repped anyway, probably a good read.
    (Original post by Wilfred Little)
    Be succinct. Not reading all of that.
    (Original post by hellodave5)
    A TL;DR Plz
    (Original post by Twinpeaks)
    You're having a laff if you think we're going to read that.

    And sorry hun, that wasn't my oestrogen speaking. :rolleyes:
    Thanks y'all for the critique xD this is actually a draft of what I'm going to challenge in an essay (of only 600 words, fml :rofl:). I'll most likely edit the post when I'll come up with the essay to give a more academic overview, but until then, I'm getting all my guns pointed at feminism.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iAmanze)
    TL;DR

    Repped anyway, probably a good read.
    kek
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I READ IT ALL. :cool:
    You make some very good points, LaMandarine!

    "seeing some bum bum" -
    Made me laugh way more than it should've. :teehee:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    i actually read most of this in roughly 5 minutes so yeah, i am superior to most of the people in this thread.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingStannis)
    i actually read most of this in roughly 5 minutes so yeah, i am superior to most of the people in this thread.
    :rofl: I must admit it took me 8 to read it again after I wrote it all.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LaMandarine)
    :rofl: I must admit it took me 8 to read it again after I wrote it all.
    Would you sum it up for me, at the very least?
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Confused with the "she asked for it" bit. Are you saying there's some sort of acceptable area, but short of rape? :confused:

    Also I feel like I deserve a sticker for reading.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: April 22, 2016

2,332

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

  • create my feed
  • edit my feed
Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
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.