Welcome to Gaia! ::

PLEASE read the first post if you wish to make a contribution. It may answer a point you feel you want to address.

I do not ask that you agree 100%, just that people try to see where the other side is coming from. Thank you.

There have been too many threads talking about how feminists are sexist, comparing feminists to extremist groups, and generally going on about how unnecessary they are.

They all seem to have the same theme: Because men and women have the same rights legally, equality of the sexes has already been achieved and is not under threat, therefore anything in favor of that is unnecessary and sexist.

First, let me emphasize that the feminist movement is solely for equality of the sexes. I emphasize this because it is apparent that many people do not understand this and think that it is solely for the advancement of females. While these two causes ran side by side before, in modern times it has become apparent that equality will require another approach. This approach will take a bit of advanceing and possibly downsizing the inequalities between BOTH sexes.

To show you what I mean, I'll provide a definition by Merriam-Webster:

One entry found for feminism.


Main Entry: fem·i·nism
Pronunciation: 'fe-m&-"ni-z&m
Function: noun
1 : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2 : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests
- fem·i·nist /-nist/ noun or adjective
- fem·i·nis·tic /"fe-m&-'nis-tik/ adjective

What's that you say? Both definitions are on there? I'll explain that too. Definitions in a dictionary are organized based on usage. Definition 1 is the one used more often than the others. In this case, that would mean that feminism is more commonly a movement of equality between the sexes.

But what of the second one? It can exist as a halfhearted version of the first definition or as an extremist version of it. It's either, "Women's rights? Hell yeah! Men's rights? Meh..." or, "DOWN WITH MEN!!" I dislike either form of this and am not talking about these forms of feminism. I want them gone just as much as you do. They are not the most common forms anyway.
=================

"But there are no inequalities!"

Unfortunately, this is an incorrect statement.

I'm sure it has been made familiar to many of you that there is still a gap in wages between male and female employees. (Need a source?) But because this can be explained by a few factors, I'll let this go here.

And though we may be legally equal, this current situation is not secured. For starters, the United States currently does not have an Equal Rights Amendment in place, mostly on the grounds that it is "unecessary." People seem to believe that the security of one's rights is unnecessary.

(However, this begs the question of the purpose of the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment ninja )

Secondly, as I'm sure many of you know as well, abortion rights are currently at stake. If this right is revoked it will mean that women no longer have full rights to bodily integrity like anyone else. Basically, they won't have the full protection of the right to refuse to surrender their body for the benefit of another for any reason. This right is currently inalienable, and if abortion is outlawed women'd right to BI will not be so.

And that's still not to say people don't try in other areas. Phyllis Schlafly, the poster child for anti-feminists on soapboxes, wants you to know that married women cannot be raped by their husbands, among other things.

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2007/03/30/with-this-ring-i-thee-own/

I recently recieved an email from NOW President Kim Gandy:


Keep in mind this is one person's persepective on it. There are a few things in that email I do not wish to comment on, including the unequal pay and unequal representation in government.

=================

But wait! I must object! I'm a feminist but I'm pro-life!

Then I am sorry to say you are a hypocrite.

ATTN LIFERS: PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE REST OF THIS SEGMENT BEFORE YOU COMMENT ON IT.

If feminism is about the equality of the sexes (and some people like to emphasize that it has a feminie focus), wouldn't that mean that women should be equal to men? So how can you claim to be a feminist when you support a movement that would strip women of their right to bodily integrity (or at least make it so that a pregnant woman's right is not inalienable as opposed t the rest of the population.) Hardly equality.

Here are a few common arguments in favor of pro-life feminism:

-But what about the girl babies?
This likes to imply that female fetii are special and less worthy of abortion then their male counterparts. Again, if you believe this to be true you cannot be part of a movement that supports equality. Either we're both special or neither one of us are.

-Men liked to treat their wives as objects in the past. Why should we do that to fetii?
Unless women in the 50's made a habit of directly feeding off the organs of their husbands, that's hardly the same thing. Besides, divorce was always an option.

-It takes away a woman's greatest power: The ability to give birth.
I know of many women who have made many contributions other than pumping out babies.

What do you believe happens when a woman decides she isn't going to have a child? Does her value decrease because she doesn't wish to take advantage of her "greatest power?" As opposed to when she is reduced to less than a convicted felon (they don't have to give up their organs, yanno) for the sake of her "baby?" All because she consented to sex? I'd consider that a decrease in value.

You also make one false assumption: That all women want to be mommies. Check out childfree communities, you'll see plenty of women. You'll see plenty of childfree women here on Gaia. Personally I would like to be a mother, but only by adoption. I do not want to reproduce EVER.

-Abortion contributes to the idea that women are the weaker sex.
Err, can someone explain the logic behind this? sweatdrop

-Nobody has the right to kill a child! Or anyone!
You are when their life conflicts with your BI. That is why blood, marrow, and organ donation is optional even when the patient is a minor. That is why you are allowed to kill in self-defense.

=================

"Okay, so you have legal rights now, why are you crying about opression that doesn't exist?"

Nonexistant "opression"(I would rather use a better term) is another unfortunate misconception, though a lot of this today is from social relationships rather than from law.

There are now laws that prevent discrimination based on race. However, it would be laughable to suggest that racism is not a part of our society today. How is that different from feminism?

Here is a fine list of social inequalities. I also encourage more browsing throughout that site, as it has other good pages.

Look closely at that list before you cry opression, boys. That list does display some inequalities against guys.

An example:



Keep in mind that that list is by no means a complete one for either sex. There are legal inequalities against men. One that comes to mind is issues dealing with children and family court. It is said that in family court, the mother of the children is usually favored over the father due to the assumptions of maternal instincts.

A website on Men's activism, which obviously puts emphasis on issues negatively affecting men: http://news.mensactivism.org/

In this post I have shown that there are inequalities against men as well as women. Any feminist with brain cells would realize that equality would mean to fix both sides of the issue. Unfortunately, many girls (and perhaps even guys) who claim to be feminists do not see this. This does not change the true meaning of feminism any more than the people of Westboro Baptist Church change the true meaning of Christianity.

And don't get me started on international issues. *cough*FGM!*cough*female infanticide!*cough*

=================

"But I want to be a housewife. Am I not allowed?"

Of course you're allowed! That's another misconception of feminism. True feminism encourages women to make choices for themselves, even the choice does not represent the majority of women.

Being a housewife is a wonderful option for life - if it's truly your choice. Just like any career path out there.

=================

"But I thought you were all about wearing combat boots and being masculine!"

No, that's yet another misconception. The "diesel dyke" stereotype of feminists has always been around as long as the feminist movement began. Men in power would feel threatened and then smear the "opposition". Most of these tactics dealt with physical appearance, in which even the figures considered by supporters to be "feminie and graceful" were reduced to "masculine, wearing combat boots, swearing like a trooper, with hook-billed noses, small breasts, unfeminine, etc etc." Leading to the stereotype of man-hating lesbians.

BTW, that bra-burning thing? Nothing more than an urban legend.

Let's take a look at other feminist stereotypes while we're at it:

Unfeminine. While it may be true that some feminists dislike anything frilly and victorian, there are just as many who love them. Personally I'm an in-between. Love certain skirts but can't stand wearing one for long periods of time, dislike lace but love the color white, looks through Victorian Trading Co. magazines but can live without everything in there, etc etc.

Consider the flappers of the roaring twenties. They rebelled against the traditional standards for women. They wore shorter skirts, danced wild dances, drank, smoked, cut their hair, all shockers. But would you call this unfemine and ugly? Would you call this masculine?

Flapper 1
Flappers 2

Feminists were around before then too. Consider Olympe de Gouges, who pushed for a constitution protecting the rights of women during the French Revolution. She was executed, but it wasn't for wearing combat boots and swearing like a sailor.

Susan B. Anthony. Everyone knows about her, right? Need I say more?

Lesbians. This one is just ridiculous. Just because a woman doesn't want to be forced into involuntary servitude as a housewife and incubator means she has no romantic interest in men?

Anti-family. To this I say:
Feminist mothers at home
Feminist mothers webring.

I dare anyone to give me something showing how feminists plan to destroy the family.

Anyone have any others?

================
On "playing favorites" toward women:

Personally, I'd be a bit insulted and I am insulted at girls who want to have special status over men. In the past women were put on pedestals. They were too fragile, too weak, too ignorant. They were meant to sit pretty and not do/know much.

Now it's a different thing, only the same. These girls want to put women back on pedestals. All of a sudden it's not that we're not good enough, but that we're too good for the ways of the world. We're too special to take a punch. We're too special to be treated equally in the workplace without sending the men to sensitivity training. We may not be too fragile to take a punch or too fragile to hear a sex joke anymore, but the effect is the same.

Conclusion? Cut it out, female supremacists (I refuse to call you feminists). You're taking two steps backwards.

To show an example: Reuters Article and Video: Women on walk signals in Madrid. This is just ridiculous.

It's a gender-neutral street sign and women are whining that it doesn't represent them. It isn't like women don't wear anything other than skirts and ponytails anymore.

=================

Any questions about feminism will be answered, common ones placed in this post.

=================

Posts from others:



True. I forgot to bring up rape issues.
Also, I would like to add this, to show another inequality against men: If a man was raped and he tried to report it, do you really think he'd be taken seriously? Do you think that is fair?

I'll say it again: There is a major difference between social equality and physical equality. Nobody is fighting for the right to allow women to piss standing up. I would, however, like to see a woman (among other things) be able to live how she wishes without judgement for her sex life or other things.


Well said. I do ask that people keep good conduct in here, folks.

This is from elsewhere, but it needs posting.
With permission:

While she deserves a standing ovation for the part of the post discussing feminism/feminaziism (the bold), I disagree with the rest. I dislike such a negative attitude toward men's issues and feel that is half the problem between the sexes today. That sentence referring to "men's obsessive desire to be the center of every issue" is referring to a good number of male Gaians (as implied in her comment about Gaia standards) who seem to enjoy hijacking threads about issues such aas raping a woman to whine about how men can be raped, too. These people annoy me and that does not reflect my view of men's issues in the real world.

Now, many people posting here do not get what I mean when I say equality. To clarify again, I am not fighting for the right of women to piss standing up. Take a look at this, please:



On the issue of a "politically correct" walk signal in Madrid:



=================

EDIT: I stumbled across a bit of bad wording there. What I meant to say that I feel it's important to campaign to help men in that situation as well.

EDIT2: All of you people saying that men and women are 100% equal right now, PROVE IT. Along with that proof I would like to see a complete rebuttal of the inequality post I've listed above.

EDIT3: Men's activism website added. Look above, or just click: http://news.mensactivism.org/

EDIT4: CUT THE EQUALIST/HUMANIST CRAP.
("OMG, you shouldn't call yourself a feminist! You're an equalist!" wink
I'm tired of seeing it. There is no difference between feminism and equalism/humanism save for the names. Guys here (I don't want to stereotype, but that IS what has been going on.) have just been whining that the name of the former has a feminine root due to historical ties and does not include them. Yet these same people have made fun of the "picky" girls who birth at terms like "policeman" and call themselves "womyn." IT'S THE SAME THING PEOPLE, BE CONSISTENT.

"But equalist sounds better!"

Why do you think I made this thread in the first place? It's true, the top does say that I am not trying to convert people, but I would love to see the attitudes toward feminism get better. Your "call yourself such-and-such because it sounds better" is like banning gay adoption because America isn't ready for it. It's too PC. Times change, grow up and accept it.

EDIT5: Added section on pro-life "feminism." Also added breaks for the sake of organization.

EDIT6: Added a Gaian's post that clarifies what I mean by equality.

EDIT7: Added a dictionary definition courtesy of Merriam-Webster to explain the meaning of feminism. Changed title. Other minor corrections.

EDIT8: Added a segment about feminist stereotypes, including unfeminine, lesbian, and anti-family. Added a segment on preferential treatment.

EDIT9: Added a news article.

EDIT10: Added a blog entry concerning anti-feminist comments by Schlafly. See it at the end of the "there are no inequalities!" segment.

EDIT11: Added a recent email with more statistics. See in "There are no inequalities! segment.

I'd like to add two more:

Feminism is destroying real men.
And what exactly is a "real" man? A 400lb man who sits on the couch drinking beer, grunting "Tittehs!" whenever Girls Gone Wild commercials come on, and barking at his wife to make him a sammich?

I don't think so. This goes right back to one of the things that feminists are fighting against. "Real men" are supposedly "disappearing" just because men aren't overflowing with fake displays of testosterone. Men are adopting what are traditionally seen as "feminine" qualities -- caring about appearance, communication, wanting equality in a relationship, etc. But wait, girls are weaker, so if a man takes on any of these it must mean he's weaker, too. Puhhh-lease. If it works for the individual, it doesn't matter if Bob was to go get a facial or if Jane would rather be shopping at Home Depot.

It's not "destroying" anything but useless gender roles.

Feminists are bossy, controlling, emotionless, bitchy, etc.
Isn't it funny how these traits are "good" qualities for men to have -- showing that they're in control, not doormats, etc. -- but become bad when applied to women? Gender roles and/or double standards, anyone?



That aside, feminists are perfectly capable of being emotional, loving, crying at a movie, etc.


Well, personally, I wouldn't consider them feminists. The ideals of feminism are equality, and the "extremists" in this case do not follow those. They could be considered extremist "feminist" in the same way that Fred Phelps is an extremist "Christian."

I agree with you a hundred percent.

Actually the reason I do so is because I keep screwing up the little bit quotes. Its nt that I do not know how to use them simply that I am mainly gonna screw it up. >.<

I understand.

Just do you know in the future, if you make a post that does not contain quotes, it is generally assumed that your point was directed at the OP.

Actually, you bring up a good point that I forgot to mention. Do you mind if I put part of your post on the OP?