[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 .

[Eddie.]

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

[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.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Withano

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

Happy Valentines Day Withano

[Smithy]

Originally Posted by Eddie.

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

Jesus ****ing Christ

[Crimson Dynamo]

For me it comes across as a negative word.

[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.

[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.

[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.]

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.

[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.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Marches

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.

Since when?!

I have never ever heard anyone say that only men abuse women. Its much much more common (especially to a level where a shelter would be required in the first place), but to say it never happens the other way around is just ridiculous Even if a few people do think that, there is nothing stopping people from fundraising for male only shelters (if they don't exist already).

[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]

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 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.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

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.

But the suggestion that equality can be achieved by addressing only women's rights is a gross oversimplification... To the extent that the two are, in my opinion, barely related. They're both valuable causes, sure, but entirely separate... In fact, trying to ensure equality is respected whilst trying to tackle women's rights issues specifically is hugely difficult, AND trying to address equality issues whilst keeping the focus squarely on women's rights is near impossible. In both cases, it's needlessly tying one arm behind our backs, and to be frank, there's a reason that it quite blatantly isn't really working as a combined cause. Is there anyone who can say with a straight face that it's currently effective? It's a bar brawl.

[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

[Vicky.]

So again, what would be effective? Should we just do nothing at all while women are still treat like crap..

Of course not all mens lives are totally rosy either, but it really is mainly women who receive the ****ty end of the stick.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

So again, what would be effective? Should we just do nothing at all while women are still treat like crap..

Of course not all mens lives are totally rosy either, but it really is mainly women who receive the ****ty end of the stick.

No, there are plenty of issues facing women still, especially globally, that need to be tackled for what they are, and by all means call that movement feminism, though I personally think the term itself is permanently damaged.

When it comes to the actual pursuit of equality, though, feminism monopolies the narrative in destructive ways and that's what needs to end. The idea that the path to equality lies solely in female empowerment is fundamentally flawed. In fact the idea that any equality battle is limited to "imbalances between the sexes" is hugely short sighted... There are huge amounts of oppression in our society, massive inequalities across the board, and yes maybe a lot of those "at the top of the pile" happen to be men but that misses the point by a country mile. Real inequality has absolutely nothing to do with penises and vaginas, its all just a distraction.

[Withano]

Lets be serious, the issue is people confusing feminists with misandrists, and misandrists confusing their views for feminism. Take those idiots out of the equation, and feminism (its real meaning) is an essential part of the 21st century.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Withano

Lets be serious, the issue is people confusing feminists with misandrists, and misandrists confusing their views for feminism. Take those idiots out of the equation, and feminism (its real meaning) is an essential part of the 21st century.

Its misandrists confusing their views for feminism, calling their views feminism, being recognised by others as misandrists who call themselves feminists, and other non-misandrist feminists flat out refusing to accept that there are many feminists who are misandrists. "Those aren't real feminists tho" is nothing more than a head planted firmly in the sand.

You CANNOT untangle the two at this point, it's an impossible task. The real meaning of feminism was an essential part of the 20th century, the 21st century needs to develop a more modern, nuanced and inclusive drive for equality that separates itself from that or it will simply fail.

Or doggedly cling to the current rhetoric and continue to engage in confused, scrappy skirmishes forever I guess, because the mantras must be protected at all costs. That's bound to result in some really positive outcomes.

[Withano]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Its misandrists confusing their views for feminism, calling their views feminism, being recognised by others as misandrists who call themselves feminists, and other non-misandrist feminists flat out refusing to accept that there are many feminists who are misandrists. "Those aren't real feminists tho" is nothing more than a head planted firmly in the sand.

You CANNOT untangle the two at this point, it's an impossible task. The real meaning of feminism was an essential part of the 20th century, the 21st century needs to develop a more modern, nuanced and inclusive drive for equality that separates itself from that or it will simply fail.

Or doggedly cling to the current rhetoric and continue to engage in confused, scrappy skirmishes forever I guess, because the mantras must be protected at all costs. That's bound to result in some really positive outcomes.

I can misandrists and feminists are different things in my head, those that think otherwise are idiots. I have that **** covered.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Withano

I can misandrists and feminists are different things in my head, those that think otherwise are idiots. I have that **** covered.

You can untangle it in your head, sure. I'm sure if you really tried you could even untangle it in a few other people's heads. But you can't untangle it from the direction of the movement itself, certainly not faster than its falling apart.

I have to go back to the "preaching to the choir" part here. If the only people who are listening to "real feminist rhetoric" are people who are *already* "real feminists"... Then it isnt worth anything. At all. Unless you are particularly fond of a good circlejerk.