Why should I be a feminist?

Post Reply New Topic

You should be a humanist. Feminism is just too one sided. With Humanism you can work towards the (full) quality of both genders.

You misunderstand, as many do who use humanism as a code for feminism+meninism, what humanism is.

https://www.progressivewomensleadership ... -humanism/

http://everydayfeminism.com/2013/05/why ... -feminism/

http://www.rebellesociety.com/2015/12/0 ... -humanism/

http://humanistlife.org.uk/2015/03/07/w ... d-in-hand/

https://goodmenproject.com/featured-con ... helps-men/

http://everydayfeminism.com/2012/08/why ... eminism-3/

http://www.blogher.com/guy-s-guide-femi ... ps-men-too

http://thefbomb.org/2010/05/how-feminis ... the-women/

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/20 ... ims-gender

^In other news, Coca Cola don't think you should drink Pepsi.

Egalitarianism does not require a bolt-on.

Damn mods have been busy.

To be honest aeandi just be whatever the f*** you want without all these pigeon holes because frankly your beliefs are never going completely agree with a idealism.

While I do not know the issues between you and fireball it's kinda weird that he makes it his mission to cyber stalk you. I'm guessing you both have history?

Also when I looked at the reddit thread I had no idea what was you comment I just meant the guy in the video was antagonising feminists perhaps making them more passionate/extreme in their views than usual when you nteracted with them

One of the links I provided was actually from a humanist organisation in the UK. I don't expect you actually looked at any of them, though. You have your ideas, and no reasonable argument will change them.

Respond how you like, you won't hear from me further. I am too familiar now with your style of online discussion to bother trying to have an actual conversation with you--conversation is not what you're looking for.

Have a good day!

Actually, the link you provided was to a guest article written by a feminist on humanistlife.org.uk - and considering I mentioned egalitarianism, which neither humanism nor feminism hold the rights to, I'm not sure what your point is. Coca Cola advertises all over the place. You can't miss it.



Whereas I don't make assumptions, I prefer presumptions because facts are superior to feels.



Oh, I'm quite amenable to reasonable arguments. When do you intend to provide some?



You should learn some new songs.



The only person you're putting down here is yourself. It may be too much to hope that you'll one day realise and accept this.



Thanks for the sentiment, but I prefer to have great days. You try not to have a terrible one.

Hehehehe......

Well then how about 'Gender Equality Activist' instead of something too vague and non-specific as 'Humanist'.

I feel GEA is specific enough to communicate your movement is both Humanist and specifically aiming for gender equality rather than Humanist and Feminist or Men's rights activist and humanist.

If Feminists feel the need to hold onto the label because, 'Humanist' is too vague and not a 'movement', then the 'Gender Equality Activism Movement' should suffice.

But, oh wait, that would mean SOME Feminist's would get rid of the label Feminist, and personally I've seen very few of them would want that.

Why else would they consistently have to write all these articles in the first place to justify their militant hold onto the term when at this point many consider it obsolete?



This is because in some people's personal experiences, just the implication that a woman is a 'Feminist' makes them uncomfortable because they've only had negative experiences with the "very, very small minority" (who coincidentally seem unusually common) of extremist Feminist's who want superiority or do not focus on men's issues at all.

Per chance another reason why some Feminist's who want equality wouldn't want to be associated with a movement that seems so full of extremists for some people that they wouldn't want to be associated with those types?

GEA seems appropriate.



Ah, the old historical relevance argument.



I'm tired of seeing every Feminist I've ever met and almost all Feminist authors and articles I've read in books or seen online always believing women have it worse than men.

I don't think I can think of a single case where any of them believed both men and women have it equally bad, just in different ways. Funny, because I've met many equalists who actually do believe this.



No, the single most important thing we need for gender equality is a movement that does not specifically fight for one gender in name and definition.

feminism
ˈfɛmɪnɪz(ə)m/Submit
noun
the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement

It doesn't matter if a Feminist does focus on men's issues 20% of the time, that's still 80% of the time focusing on women's rights, which is preferential treatment and focus of one genders inequalities and issues in society over the other.

I wonder what we could call a movement that does no specifically imply preferential treatment or preferential focus on one gender over the other?

Gender Equality Activist Movement: the advocacy of both men and women's rights in equal measure with the intended goal of the equality of the sexes.



To be fair, nowadays they coulda fooled me.

Besides, unlike Feminist's who cannot use a neutral term, LGBT people aim to fight for 'marriage equality' and I've seen many refuse to call it 'gay marriage'.



To be fair, I'd rather every movement be separated by category, but not by specific kinds of people.

So, for racial equality movements, I'd rather it be 'Racial Equality Movement' then the 'Black Equality' or 'Caucasianism' movement.

And the LGBT I'd rather it be 'Gender and Sexual Orientation Equality Movement' because then it is inclusive to straight people.

I'd rather every movement be both the privileged and under-privileged come together and communicate ideas and learn from one another and work together rather than the need to separate and differentiate themselves from the privileged.



No, this woman's argument doesn't make sense.

I'd rather it be 'These are my issues, you've just told me mine. How can we, through mutual co-operation, sort this out?'.

A movement that does not include the privileged marginalizes the issues the privileged may still face and is thus not inclusive to their lesser known struggles.



This is just an unfair, presumptuous generalization, and removes almost all credibility I would have given this person otherwise.



More ad hominem insulting anyone who dares question the modern continued use of the term 'Feminism'.

Why would I give credibility to someone who wants to hold onto the term Feminist if they constantly insult their audience?



Considering this GenderQueer trend that's risen in the last few years where it seems everyone is so confused of their gender or 'know their gender' but choose to identify as PanQueerDemiPoly Memesexual, and prefer the pronouns They/Them/Zir/Zar/Flim/Flam/Harambe I'd much rather the lines between masculinity and femininity not be blurred.

There is a difference between blurring the lines and thus confusing society as a whole and keeping the difference between masculinity and femininity clear and distinct but allowing people the freedom to choose how much they do or do not fit into these roles.

Besides, I haven't seen these supposed 'benefits' of Feminism.

A lot of young men still feel the pressure of gender roles to live up to the stereotypically masculine ideal.

If anything, some Feminist's I see value Femininity in men and consider 'traditional' masculinity oppressive, toxic and a part of the 'patriarchy'.

Traditional masculinity such as interest in building muscle, hard labor work, having a patriarchal household where the man chooses to work a job and would prefer his wife to stay at home to perform domestic duties, enjoy cars, guns and football, has a full, rugged beard and is well-groomed and hygienic but not afraid to get his hands dirty and avoid the 'pretty boy' look, hardworking, having a strong sense of brotherhood with his male friends and family, and if words and persuasion do not work is not afraid to challenge another man to a fair fight, should never be looked down on or etched out of society in the push for the end of gender roles.

Many of the young men I've met who were in a relationship with the Feminist's girls I knew in high school were skinny, effeminate behaving male Feminists. Some of them looked and acted stereotypically gay. They spoke with light voices and went for the 'pretty boy' look.

That BLOGHER article does have a point though, in that Feminism has helped men in some ways.

It says 'men can choose to be a Feminist too!'.

Well, that's good.

Doesn't mean I personally will. But more power to the rest of the men who want to.

Anyway, I don't have the time to read everything else. But make of it what you will of what I've already typed.

Almost ALL of those sources simply regurgitate the same argument. They're all very similar in what they say. Talk about having a diverse range of compelling arguments rather than the same opinion by a few online writers written 10 times over just in different ways.

Last edited by Outrider on 27 Oct 2016, 7:24 am, edited 5 times in total.

Why should I be a feminist ... If they're just going to accuse me of being a white knight?

Why does it bother you to be accused of white knightery? Is this a suggestion that you are acting in such a way as to get approval from women and thus have a better chance at having sex with them?

I have to ask why you are being a feminist in the first place? If it is because you believe in the tenets of feminism then forget about what anyone says. They don't know you.

Personally, I find feminism a bit too strident for my taste. I'm for Individualism.

No replies to my posts, so I win. [/thread]

If you don't want to be a feminist, be a meninist instead, like this charming fellow!

http://thetab.com/uk/2016/10/20/spoke-a ... dder-23156

Yes, I realise he is most likely a troll--I just can't believe anyone is truly THAT ignorant, even at that young age--but he is just as representative of dudes in the men's rights movement as what most people here seem to think feminists are (which is, not truly representative at all but a ridiculous hyperbolic parody that gets attention because of the hyperbole.)

(BTW guys: our urethra--where urine comes out--really is separate from our vagina--where period blood comes out. Check out this diagram if you don't believe me: External Female Reproductive Anatomy (NSFW) That's right--there are separate holes for urine and for period blood/penises/babies! )

Oh my god this guy had been all over our papers here in england. I actually feel a bit sorry for him, how can he be such an idiot

I really don't think he is actually that stupid, I think it is all an act for attention. I think he thinks he's trolling us and being amusing. I don't think he actually believes the stupid things he's saying.

If he is genuinely that stupid (doubtful, but certainly possible), then I feel sorry for him because that level of ignorance that seems impermeable to new learning probably means he is actually intellectually challenged and CAN'T learn any better. I hope for his sake that it is indeed trolling and he's not actually stuck at that level of stupid for life, because what kind of future could he possibly have with that combination of stupidity and wilful ignorance? Not a life I would want to live, not a life with foreseeable bright spots of any sort. Though, if he is that dumb it would explain his attempt to get 15 seconds of fame in the way that he went about it.

The tabloids are reporting that his girlfriend dumped him. Whether he is a troll or just a dumbass, I hope that's true and she ends up with someone who doesn't hate her and has some functional knowledge of female anatomy.

Yeah, so far, I have yet to see all these hordes of people who are suddenly identifying as "genderqueer." And "genderqueer-ness" has been around for a lot longer than the past few years. I became involved with it in the late 90s.

And, if the masculine and feminine models of behavior don't work for some people, I can't think of any good reason why they shouldn't reject them completely. Society will get along just fine. Personally, I identify as agender. There is no benefit for me in going down a checklist and marking-off the "masculine traits" I posses, and then going down another checklist for my "feminine traits." That doesn't work for me, so I dumped it.

As for my pronouns, people can refer to me using either masculine or feminine words; I care not.

What other people call themselves or ask to be called makes not a bit of difference to me, my sexuality or sense of my own gender.

In other news, loads of gay men and lesbians have gotten married in recent years with no impact on my marriage.

It seems like hysterical nonsense when people claim their reality is shaken by these things, but perhaps the ones who get upset about it are very differently constituted than me and much more susceptible to aspects of their imaginations.

The sad truth is despite how much feminists preach about how it's misogynist to be nice to them just to get laid, male feminists can pretty much get laid whenever they want because feminists trust them so much. The feminists' boyfriends are just as guilty of "misogyny" as any of the guys who "act nice, but want sex" that they constantly complain about. These male feminists also preach to other men about how they're not entitled to sex and how wrong it is to be nice to a girl just to get laid, even when they've been doing it their entire life but is somehow justified when they do it.

Despite being a holier-than-thou know-it-all socially progressive man preaching to other men that they are not and will never be entitled to sex, these feminist men have never experienced a day in their life where they weren't entitled to sex by their feminist girlfriend. They live in an entire fantasy world where everything they do gets rewarded. They never had to work their ass off to show how legitimate their respect to women was. They never even had to think twice about it. Feminist women just assume he's legit.

It's not even so black and white. You CAN be legitimately respectful towards women AND want sex at the same time, AND not everyone who does gets lucky! Male feminists don't respect women more than anyone else, it's LUCK, LUCK, LUCK, LUCK!

I have a girlfriend who is not a feminist. I am not looking to date a feminist, but I at least want to be respected by feminists. The only problem is feminists only respect guys who they sleep with.