[Kizzy]

It is a dirty word, it's been made one, like 'progressive' and 'pc' and 'socialist'

These are good and positive traits, but touted like dirty words... :/

[Brillopad]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

It is a dirty word, it's been made one, like 'progressive' and 'pc' and 'socialist'

These are good and positive traits, but touted like dirty words... :/

PC has become a dirty word due to the over-the-top controlling behaviour of those that indulge. Their doing - no-one elses.

[Eddie.]

I don't believe in feminists, I think all genders should be equal tbh...

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

PC has become a dirty word due to the over-the-top controlling behaviour of those that indulge. Their doing - no-one elses.

So some words can be tainted, but others can't? How do you come to that conclusion?

Feminism has become a dirty word for almost exactly the same reasons; aggressive, controlling and exclusionary behaviour from people who use the word as a banner term for their cause.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Eddie.

I don't believe in feminists, I think all genders should be equal tbh...

So you do agree with feminists then

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

So you do agree with feminists then

I think this is the earliest in the afternoon I have ever laughed.

[Crimson Dynamo]

For me it comes across as a negative word.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Withano

I think this is the earliest in the afternoon I have ever laughed.

Happy Valentines Day Withano

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

So some words can be tainted, but others can't? How do you come to that conclusion?

Feminism has become a dirty word for almost exactly the same reasons; aggressive, controlling and exclusionary behaviour from people who use the word as a banner term for their cause.

That's what I've been saying the word Feminism has been tainted ,but when we say that people think we're being dramatic but it's true.

There's too many bad examples of feminists and it ruins it for the sane ones .

[user104658]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

That's what I've been saying the word Feminism has been tainted ,but when we say that people think we're being dramatic but it's true.

There's too many bad examples of feminists and it ruins it for the sane ones .

There's some weird refusal to admit it, though, as if doing so is in some way a "defeat". It's more about stubbornness than any sort of desire for equality, though .

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

There's some weird refusal to admit it, though, as if doing so is in some way a "defeat". It's more about stubbornness than any sort of desire for equality, though .

Or people just don't think the same as you. Could be that aswell

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Or people just don't think the same as you. Could be that aswell

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Or people just don't think the same as you. Could be that aswell

The general bitterness, snarkiness and sarcasm that often surrounds the issue would suggest otherwise though, surely? That it's just more team-forming and tribalism, "loyalty to the feminism team", and not actually all that concerned with solutions that increase equality. Which is supposedly the aim? It just doesn't seem that self-declared "feminists(tm)" would ever willingly diverge from that, for some reason, all-important label EVEN IF doing so would actually result in increased equality, and more quickly. And if that is the case, then the primary aim of feminism is clearly NOT equality, but rather, something else, if winning the battle is more important than the overall practical outcome.

Feminism HAS become a toxic term, there's vast amounts of evidence that it at this point promotes huge, unhelpful backlash. It's absolutely everywhere. And the huge denial campaign surrounding it is little more than pettiness and point scoring.

"In My Opinion", of course, if it's for some reason still necessary to point out that I am fully aware that "other people think differently".

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Eddie.

I don't believe in feminists, I think all genders should be equal tbh...

Jesus ****ing Christ

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The general bitterness, snarkiness and sarcasm that often surrounds the issue would suggest otherwise though, surely? That it's just more team-forming and tribalism, "loyalty to the feminism team", and not actually all that concerned with solutions that increase equality. Which is supposedly the aim? It just doesn't seem that self-declared "feminists(tm)" would ever willingly diverge from that, for some reason, all-important label EVEN IF doing so would actually result in increased equality, and more quickly. And if that is the case, then the primary aim of feminism is clearly NOT equality, but rather, something else, if winning the battle is more important than the overall practical outcome.
.

Like?

What do you think would actually increase equality? Which solutions are you talking about that would bring around change quickly that feminists are ignoring?

Genuinely interested in this.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Like?

What do you think would actually increase equality? Which solutions are you talking about that would bring around change quickly that feminists are ignoring?

Genuinely interested in this.

Redefining an equality movement that actually feels equal for those who currently don't feel like it's equal - even if it IS equal - is essential for the final push in equality. Completely essential. Whether right or wrong, whether those who happily wear the badge of feminism want to believe it or not, the term "feminism", and the idea that males can only support and not be a part of the dialogue, are themselves representation of inequality for many and will generate a degree of backlash.

The important part here is, that is the case whether rightly or wrongly and no amount of face-palming / laughing / insisting on the "real" definition will change that. Which is why in my opinion, clinging to the term is a collective act of defiance and stubbornness - "you can't and won't take this from us!" - rather than any sort of tool for achieving equality.

Why is it all-important? Because at this point, if the dialogue doesn't change, all that is happening is preaching to the choir. Campaign after campaign to gain the support of whom? To raise awareness with whom? The people who already believe in and support equality? its cyclical and pointless. At some point the focus has to shift. And sooner rather than later because, if you take a close look at at, its fairly evident that support is actually already slipping.

[Vicky.]

OK so you think naming feminism, as something other than feminism will increase equality faster? Thats how that reads to me.

I reckon no matter what feminism is called, and even if male people were the ones 'setting the dialogue' so to speak, it would still be deeply unpopular. And always will be. Its all well and good saying 'I believe in equality' but when push comes to shove, so many actually do not, and this is shown up time and time again when moves that might actually go towards increasing equality are trashed left right and centre and feminists vilified. Hell half the stuff feminists get the blame for it not even anything to do with fmeinists

Same as BLM get a whole bunch of negativity tbh. Aims are admirable, but people are all 'surely ALL lives matter' and such.

[Marches]

But why feminism and not humanitarian or egalitarian? Why must the focus be on women? Why has most of society prioritised protecting just women? Why are male abuse shelters being refused funding and why are men not allowed in most abuse shelters?

[Vicky.]

This is all quite new to me tbh. I would not have described myself as a feminist a year or so ago. I remember niamh and livia ripping me a new one for saying I was not a feminist I did think feminist means someone actively campaigning for change..and also did have the idea that feminists were all hairy legged dungaree wearing bra burning man hating lesbians. Which is what the press consistently try to make out is the case. Its fairly recently I have discovered this is not actually the case.

I don't understand a LOT of feminist arguments. So don't really feel I am 'qualified' to be talking about this stuff.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

OK so you think naming feminism as something other than feminism will increase equality faster? Thats how that reads to me.

Renaming? No, not just that, the current way the cause focuses itself needs to be entirely redefined from the ground up. The name needs to be abandonned for two reasons. The first being that it has become heavily associated with angry, militant, sarcastic misandry. I know that self declared feminists who dont fall into that category find that hard to admit or accept, but it has, and at this point, it isn't a "small extreme minority" at all... It's a small extreme minority heavily backed by every idiot with a social media account and an axe to grind.

The second is relatively simple. The idea that a true end-game equality movement can be named "feminism" is obviously and immediately flawed.

[user104658]

Here's something interesting though: I would have far less problem with feminism if it DID simply declare itself a movement championing / protecting women and addressing women's issues. The "transsexuals accessing female toilets and changing areas" campaign would fall exactly under that category... It is purely a women's rights issue and not a male/female equality issue.

My real problem with the movement, is that it DOES declare itself "THE" equality movement when it's not necessarily the best equipped for that role at all. Yet it's so large, and people get so... Hm... When it's questioned, that it leaves absolutely no room for actual equality campaigning.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Marches

But why feminism and not humanitarian or egalitarian? Why must the focus be on women? Why has most of society prioritised protecting just women? Why are male abuse shelters being refused funding and why are men not allowed in most abuse shelters?

Those are already things, and people are free to define as those if they want to

My understanding of feminism is not quite just equality of the sexes, that would be a humanist (which I am also). Feminism to me is liberation of women from oppression. Which is why IMO it makes sense for it to be female centred.

Female abuse shelters are refused funding also as funding is just not really there. Also its a supply and demand thing. Most shelters I know of are only still open due to fundraising/donations from the general public, and usually women. Men could also fundraise and set up shelters (most..possibly nearly all female ones were actually set up by women, to help women. So there is nothing stopping men opening one to help men) for themselves.

Men are not usually able to use female shelters because most women there are escaping violence from men. Unfortunately men are in a bit of a bad situation here as a lot DV against men is also committed by men (be they fathers, brothers, partners etc) so whilst it may be best for them mentally to not be around men, its not feasible when some shelters are split by sex.

I don't think women should be in male only shelters either BTW. I don;t know if they are allowed to be.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Here's something interesting though: I would have far less problem with feminism if it DID simply declare itself a movement championing / protecting women and addressing women's issues. The "transsexuals accessing female toilets and changing areas" campaign would fall exactly under that category... It is purely a women's rights issue and not a male/female equality issue.

My real problem with the movement, is that it DOES declare itself "THE" equality movement when it's not necessarily the best equipped for that role at all. Yet it's so large, and people get so... Hm... When it's questioned, that it leaves absolutely no room for actual equality campaigning.

See this is actually what I understand feminism to be I know many do say its about equality for both sexes, but I understand it to be addressing womens rights/issues, to eventually achieve equality with men. So yes, its about equality as an endgame, but the way to get there is to address womens rights.

If that makes sense.

[Marches]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Here's something interesting though: I would have far less problem with feminism if it DID simply declare itself a movement championing / protecting women and addressing women's issues. The "transsexuals accessing female toilets and changing areas" campaign would fall exactly under that category... It is purely a women's rights issue and not a male/female equality issue.

My real problem with the movement, is that it DOES declare itself "THE" equality movement when it's not necessarily the best equipped for that role at all. Yet it's so large, and people get so... Hm... When it's questioned, that it leaves absolutely no room for actual equality campaigning.

This

The amount of times I’ve been told I don’t believe in equality because I don’t call myself a feminist

[Marches]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Those are already things, and people are free to define as those if they want to

My understanding of feminism is not quite just equality of the sexes, that would be a humanist (which I am also). Feminism to me is liberation of women from oppression. Which is why IMO it makes sense for it to be female centred.

Female abuse shelters are refused funding also as funding is just not really there. Also its a supply and demand thing. Most shelters I know of are only still open due to fundraising/donations from the general public, and usually women. Men could also fundraise and set up shelters (most..possibly nearly all female ones were actually set up by women, to help women. So there is nothing stopping men opening one to help men) for themselves.

Men are not usually able to use female shelters because most women there are escaping violence from men. Unfortunately men are in a bit of a bad situation here as a lot DV against men is also committed by men (be they fathers, brothers, partners etc) so whilst it may be best for them mentally to not be around men, its not feasible when some shelters are split by sex.

I don't think women should be in male only shelters either BTW. I don;t know if they are allowed to be.

Feminism has a far bigger following than the other two and it’s considered the ‘cool’ thing to be. A lot of young people, including myself, have had the term shoved down my throat before as THE equality movement. It seems bizarre why feminism instead of something that campaignes for equality of all people

Also fundraising for said shelters is really hard because a lot of people simply think it’s black and white as only men abuse women and it doesn’t happen the other way around and that the few cases are anomalies.