Would you date a feminist?

Post Reply New Topic

https://www.facebook.com/Upworthy/video ... 239296998/

This is why perception is important.

Reread what I said and understand the nuance that lies therein. It is not the sole responsibility of either myself or my partner to maintain a tidy home. How we divide our resources is based on practicality, not gender. More importantly, who does the household chores has absolutely nothing to do with equality, except how we choose or do not choose to define equality within our relationship - which applies to all couples.



Your narcissistic notions of superiority over the "uneducated" are immaterial to me. People make bad choices when it comes to relationships. If you don't want to be with someone who doesn't pull their weight around the house, pick your partner more wisely. Exercising your rights in ways which run counter to your desires is neither inequality nor oppression.



Am I, then, to assume that your guardians were arrested and put in prison for life?

You were both given equally menial, low-skill chores to do. Had your responsibilities been reversed, would you have considered your brother to be oppressed or unequal?



All over the internet. It's as closely a held secret as George Michael's sexual indiscretions in public bathrooms. Here's a starting point:

http://www.theguardian.com/education/20 ... nktank-men

"The gender disparity is particularly acute among those from disadvantaged backgrounds, with young women who were on free school meals 51% more likely to go into higher education than comparable young men. Disadvantaged white boys are the least likely of all groups to go to university, with just 8.9% continuing their studies."

There are numerous reasons for concern when impoverished young men are further disadvantaged when it comes to their desirability to the job market. It seems apparent to me that we have been overlooking the needs of boys within our schools for some time now. I would like to see this corrected.



Children's gender stereotypes are being challenged in schools therefore "perception is important"? This still isn't related to equality. Moreover, how children perceive gender roles does not prevent women applying to med school. From the article I linked: "In medicine and dentistry – among the most competitive undergraduate courses – there were 5,000 women and 3,800 men accepted last year.".

As for the military and firefighting services, there are myriad reasons why these areas will likely remain male-dominated despite any push for inclusiveity - not least the fact that women typically prefer jobs which are less dangerous than men (with single mothers and fathers choosing the safest vocations).

maybe you have a really big yard, but in our house mowing the yard took a bit over an hour once a week, while cleaning the house, cooking, and dishwashing were ongoing, time-consuming projects. we were all girls, so there was no unequal division of labor, but my neighbor always complained that her three brothers split the yard work, while she did all the "home-making" chores. she had a point. my sister's husband is disabled. he still expects her to work outside the home and do all the cleaning. sexist division of labor still exists.

i am in a relationship with someone who is not a feminist.
its kind of amazing really, that an identified feminist (me) and someone who is pretty damn close to identifying as an anti-feminist (him) can have such similar social and political ideologies.
trying to understand his reasons for identifying this way has given me insight into the bigger arguments that are happening, and so to answer the original question as a feminist, i would date a feminist or a non-feminist. however, i would not date a feminist or a non-feminist who i believe is not actually promoting gender equality.

all i mean when i say i am a feminist is that i believe in gender equality.

If you want equality, then how come you never addressed me when I brought up the fact how the FDA and insurance companies give men with testosterone dysfunction such a hard time getting treatment?

The the dismissal of men's groups as not doing anything to help their cause isn't accurate. These MRAs are only one aspect of gender politics.

Let's call the broader men's rights "Men's Rights Groups" or MRGs for clarity.

There have been father's rights groups in the UK and US for decades. If you stopped people in the street in the UK and asked them to name a famous father's rights group I bet many would name Father's For Justice, or make some reference to one of their direct action protest or strategies to draw attention to father's issues. They are famous for climbing public buildings like Westminster, Buckingham Palace usually dressed as super heros and staying there for hours until they are negotiated or force down, obviously a risk activy. They are non-violent. They did throw purple powder into a House of Commons session once. Purple is a colour they have used in there activism.

There are MRGs that do social work for men and boys. There are MRG that advocate for parental rights, prison reform, mental health, etc.

There are many polical commentators, which is a totally legitimate and effective strategy. I agree with Mary Beard's views on the politics of persuasion and the importance of oratory and the art of rhetoric (original meaning not the negative connotation it has now).

Drawing attention to issues, scrutinising draconian or poorly though out policy, forming grass roots movement. These are doing a lot. Simply taking up the slack doesn't change social policy alone, it is also about shaping public opinion or allowing them to feel they can challenge what is not free.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 25 May 2016, 2:29 am, edited 1 time in total.

I'm critical of intersectionalism

It is a nice idea in theory, but in practice it has had a negative effect on the civil rights movement.

It is marketed as a solidarity movement but that is not how it works in practice.

A classic example of instersectional double think is "black women have an even harder time applying to jobs and getting hired" the implication is that this is gender and ethnicity issue and being both a woman and black makes it twice as hard, despite the fact it may be even harder for black men. So they have taken an issue and latched onto it.

Also the stats are used selectively. According to their logic asians are the most privileged as far as the jobs market is concerned. Yet that doesn't really fit their narrative.

To use their own phrase they have "appropriated" another's movement to bolster their credibility.

It has caused damage to ethic minority politics. You only have to look at event in universities to see that.

Ironically it has led to segregationist policy. Despite the long history of fighting against that.

This is the whole problem with their entire model of privilege. It is actually pretty decisive, simplistic. It is regressive and intersectionalism is the perfect medium.

It is all supposed be about learning about plight but in reality it has been about their own theories. It is human nature if you have bought into a theory of oppression to want to apply it. You will prove yourself right whatever the cost.

Now we have people going on about that if you are in a privileged group, say cis straight white male, you can't be oppressed or discriminated against. Or if you aren't you can't be a bigot.


The stupidest thing you hear is along the lines of "it is not my responsibility to educate you, I will talk about it with my narrow intersection all day long, I don't owe you squat". The implication is you accept their policy as reasonable as they think it is without question, but somehow their narrow intersection needs more education about their own plight. Or even that being in the oppressor group you should just accept your inherent privilege, and you should be aware already.

Intersectionalism encourages a race to the bottom it is all about who is the biggest victim, who has the least privilege.

If Nelson Mandela, Aung San Suu Kyi taught us anything is that you should refuse to be a victim and not encourage it. If you create a culture of victimhoof and division you are only prolonging the issue.

Intersectionalism is nothing to do with individuals. The model is far too crude to find anyone's actual position in life, but they are quite happy to pigeon hole people.

It waters down and highjacks other movements, allows the imposition of crazy social theories that anyone with a modicum of common sense that is not indoctrinated could see through, it overides the progress these movements made over decades.

Another way of putting it is is by approach reductionist.

There's scraping the barrel and there's serving up wood-shavings. You specifically mention that her husband has a disability, don't specify the disability, yet suggest the division of labour is being distributed on the grounds of genitalia. Should I be expecting a 'gotcha' revelation that his disability is minor, that he's an awful misogynist, that he overstates the problem?

Yes, sexism exists. Sexism will continue to exist for as long as we remain a sexually dimorphic species. We can make men and women equal before the law, but we cannot make them physiologically equal. Men will continue to do the more dangerous jobs and men and women will continue to make different decisions for different reasons. Physical sports will continue to be divided along gender lines, sex will continue to be a motivator for both men and women.

Women will continue to earn less on average than men (unless we pass a law which discriminates against men), yet will continue to have most of the spending power.

"Women will control close to 75% of discretionary spending worldwide. Women own about a third of all businesses in the world, and nearly half of those businesses are in developing markets."

Now I'm going to ask the question one more time, as nobody seems able to provide an answer:

Other than selective service, can you name a law in the western world which creates inequality between men and women?



Precisely so. Advocacy is activism and vice versa.



That victimhood has become a desirable, marketable quality, thus diminishing the amount of attention legitimate victims receive, is one of the greatest failings of modern feminism.

i didn't know you were looking for an answer from me specifically.

folks with actual proven low testosterone have no trouble getting replacement from their docs. i know because i used to practice medicine. also, my husband's urologist checked my husband's testosterone level without being asked to. only reason to do that would be for replacement if low. i don't know whether insurance covers it. can you give a specific example? or better yet, a link with statistics?

i was on vaginal estrogen. supposedly my insurance covered it, but my copay ($145) was most of the hefty price.

doctors don't prescribe estrogen freely because of the association with breast cancer and heart attacks. it's given in the lowest dose for the least amount of time.

testosterone is also associated with heart attacks, which is why it's not given unless the level is documented to be low.

estrogen doesn't help libido in women. testosterone does that in women, too. used to be a hormone replacement with both estrogen and testosterone called estratest. i doubt you can still get it due to testosterone side effects.

he has arthritis. if he were inclined, he could do bits here and there taking frequent breaks all day while my sister is at work, adding up to significant help. he is not so inclined. when they both worked full time outside the home my sister did all the housework and childcare. he drank alcohol to excess in his "free" time. he is not only sexist, but also racist. his daughter wanted to stay over at a home of a classmate of a different race and he made the daughter end the friendship. his other daughter dated a young man of a different race and was nearly disowned. i wish he were the only one. if he were rich he'd be the donald. now he's likely a typical follower.

if i don't answer, don't assume i'm not interested. i'm kinda busy IRL.

anyone can use the feminist platform to construct their own motives, what matters is who people decide to listen to, and for what reasons. why do some examples of feminism get more attention than others? why do some people place themselves so far outside of feminism that they believe anything any feminist does or says is feminist? intersectional feminism fails in the same way communism fails.

i'm not interested in apathetically following sensationalized feminist propaganda because i have the freedom to construct my own feminism. it may be microscopic in comparison to other feminisms but it's mine because i think it, and i think if more people were willing to accept feminism on their own terms it would neutralize the extremism.

Arthritis aside, your sister was surely aware of his sexist and racist tendencies prior to agreeing to marry the man. Presumably he has good qualities that aren't being presented, though I'm compelled to point out that, that you're using Donald Trump as your metric for what constitutes sexism and racism rather undermines your position. However, that's all rather moot. Having sexist or racist viewpoints is not against the law, nor should it be. The kind of 'equality' being argued for over the last few pages would require the introduction of thought crimes into legislation.

On that note, what about the question I asked? I've heard a lot of noise about supposed inequality, but I've yet to be provided with a single legitimate example.



Impatience on this forum is tantamount to self-harm.

This.

I have known too many feminazis.

I would not date a feminist. Not even if the Lesbian Fairy came and kissed me and turned me into a lesbian.

I am, in fact, female.

I'm not into traditional gender roles. Im not even really very feminine. I get told that I'm unfeminine a lot.

I would not date a feminist.

I would never again date a guy who describes himself as feminist or tells he feminists trained him in how to treat women, either.

I do not like feminism. The last good things feminism did were to get rid of couverture, secure suffrage, and give women protection against violent abuse. Feminism didn't do that last one alone, either. Feminism has wrought a lot of harm and very little good in my life.