Here is a good description of the different types of modern “feminist”. It is the reason why you get the “I’m not a feminist, but…” from many women to day.
Rene Denfield wrote a book called </i>The New Victorians</i> that’s about why young women believe in the ideals of feminism but refuse to wear the label and are reluctant to join feminist groups. It’s focused on the US, since that’s where she lives, but I found it interesting even without knowing all of the local references - its well written and she argues her points well (imho).
Many feminists in the public eye are well, kind of rabid. And as people have mentioned, they insist on rigidly defining what a feminist is, so that they are able to call out “No true Scotsman” about anyone who disagrees with them. And in my opinion, they’re often focused on minor issues because they’re afraid to take on the big ones.
So many young women feel excluded from feminism. I consider myself a feminist, but I know I’m a minority among women my age (mid-20’s). And if I mention that its something I’m interested in, I get hounded by guys telling me off for believing in a vast male conspiracy (I don’t) or hating men (I don’t), and girls asking me if I shave my legs (I do).
Maybe its time for women to reclaim the label from the nutters like Dworkin?
Interesting thread.
I don’t call myself a feminist, for the reason that for as many people who hear that word there are the same number of meanings for that word. I feel the word has so many possible meanings, using it actually obscures your point.
In line with the me-oriented culture, I prefer to call myself an individualist or humanist. I firmly believe that what sort of genitals you possess has little to do with anything. Genitalia is mostly irrelevant to me (unless I was dating). I don’t believe in grouping most things via gender, or making assumptions based on gender.
I feel like I live in a relatively equal environment. Equal pay, equal legal rights, equal employment rights, etc. Socially, there’s still some inequality, IMO, but that will change over time, and the important stuff is done, in terms of securing rights, etc.
YMMV, obviously 
I agree that this is a perfectly valid position.
Feminist is a pretty strange name for someone who wants equal rights for everyone. It only makes sense with the assumption that men already have all the rights they could ever want, and females have to catch up.
However, now that women outnumber men in universities, we have title IX, abortion is legal, etc, it does not seem necessary any longer for someone who wants equal rights for everyone to be called a feminist.
I used to call myself a feminist, and if asked now if I am one I would say that I was depending on the definition given when asked, but like Goo I think it makes more sense for someone who wants equal rights for everyone to be called a name that seems to fit that ideal.
Wow.Does tha answer your question shrew?
Here we have a “feminist” saying that the ideology of “feminism” requires a pro choice viewpoint. It probably would not be too fard to find “feminists” who use a similar kind of litmus test with other issues.
There must be some kind of irony about “choice” in all of this…
I am a feminist because I don’t believe in discrimination against a person based on their gender and also because I think that women are still suffering from discrimination whether instances of this discrimination are decreasing or not. I think it was ** refusal ** who said that you only have to look at the make up of the governments of the world to see that men still hold the reins of power over the world. I believe in continuing to try to change this in order to have a more balanced world order.
I agree with you ** kung fu lola ** that it isn’t necessarily right to describe someone as ‘pro-abortion’. For the record my personal morality jury is out on this issue at the moment. However, while I concede that this is a feminist issue to a certain extent (and not just because women should have the right to make choices regarding their own bodies, but also, on the flip-side, because women should not be pressurised by society into having an abortion either) I think that this is more importantly an ethical and human rights issue and is ‘bigger’ than feminism. Fathers are involved and have rights too. When two people conceive (we all know it takes two to tango right?) they are both in it together from that moment on, though I’m not saying that the women’s involvement is not greater (as the foetus lives in her body after all).
Therefore, after a couple of badly constructed sentences - I admit it 
- I refute your point that someone who is ‘pro-life’ cannot be a feminist.
I say this because my mother is one of the most feminist people I know though she is ‘pro-life’ (also an inaccurate term as surely everyone is ‘pro-life’ but you know what I mean) and stayed at home to raise seven children.
You people are really missing my point about “pro-life”.
What I am saying is not that a woman who thinks abortion is wrong for her can’t be a feminist. I am saying that a woman who thinks abortion is wrong for * all women* can’t be a feminist. I repeat, if a woman doesn’t want to have an abortion, no one will force her to have one.
I can’t see how a woman who wants to force her will on other women can be seen as an ally in a fight for freedom and equality.
One of my mother’s best friends is Catholic and she says; “I’m pro-life, but I would never try to tell another woman what to do with her body.”
At a pro-choice concert, Gwen Stefani (also a Catholic) said; “If I got pregnant today I wouldn’t have an abortion, but isn’t it cool that women have a choice?”
According to my definition, these women are still feminists.
I noticed that no one quoted my passage re: feminism being about “freedom for all women to shape their own lives according to their own values.” That was the core point of my post. I repeat; no one who wants to force their will on someone else can be an ally in the fight for freedom and equality.
I’m not missing your point at all. You’re saying that women with a pro life viewpoint CAN NOT be feminists. (pro life…is (for better or worse) a policy viewpoint, like say civil rights legislation. It’s not just about what one person does…but about societal rules and regs)
You have a litmus test for feminism…something that shrew said doesn’t exist. You have proven the point that earlier posters have made about perceptions of feminism…that many “feminists” have litmus tests that determine whether you are “allowed” to be one.
My irony meter is spiking like made this morning at a “feminist” telling other women that they can’t choose to be pro life and call themselves feminists. :dubious:
Nope, that’s not what I’m saying. A woman can be pro-life all she wants and still be a feminist, but as soon as she tries to turn her country into a pro-life nation, she crosses the line.
Not necessarily. As I described above, there are women who describe themselves as “pro-life”, and yet have no interest in revoking rights from other women.
This is a spurious argument :dubious:
By this reasoning a woman who sees another woman stealing, murdering or otherwise breaking the law cannot try to stop her or express disapproval and still call herself a feminist - surely she would be ‘foisting’ her opinion on another woman. In that case there must be no law-abiding feminist in existence. (I would add here that many ‘pro-lifers’ see abortion as murder - rightly or wrongly as you see it - and they have a right as * people * to campaign for it to become a legal issue if this is what they believe). Your argument seems more anarchist rather than feminist i.e. people should be allowed do what they want regardless of what their society wants.
As I said before the abortion question is an issue of ethics, human rights and law. Feminist thinking has a bearing on the abortion argument of course but it is one in which everyone has a right to a say - not just women. It is not a purely feminist issue.
Kung fu lola, there are women who believe that abortion is murder. Especially late term abortion, when the baby could survive outside the womb. They do not believe that the fetus is simply part of the woman’s body, therefore they do not see it as a matter of the woman’s choice. They see it as a matter of murder.
This would only prevent them from being feminists if they thought men should be allowed to commit murder, but not women.
Incidentally, I am pro-choice. I just wanted to explain how someone could be both a feminist and pro-life.
AFAIAC, Abortion is a medical issue, as outlined in Roe v. Wade, about whether a woman has a right to privacy regarding her own medical treatment.
Whether or not it is murder, is a non-issue.
**
So these women can’t call themselves “feminists” in your world? You have a litmus test?
Then in standard parlance (of both pro life folks AND pro choice folks), those women would be considered “pro choice”. This is not some pro lifer kicking them out a pro life club…this is recognizing standard usage of the term. Take a gander at any GD thread involving abortion and you will come across someone who says “I would never have an abortion, but I don’t want to reverse Roe v Wade”. That person ALWAYS self identifies as pro choice. (This usage is not unique to GD…it’s a pretty universal understanding of the terms when it comes to public policy debates).
I’ll say it once more. Earlier posters said that one reason why more women don’t self identify as “feminists” is because the term has taken on a narrow definition. Then shrew questioned WHO was doing that defining. Your viewpoint should answer that question nicely.
I am a feminist, loud and proud, not ashamed in any way. Also fervently pro-choice. I want to try to add some clarification to the feminist/pro-life question:
Germaine Greer pointed out that the “choice” whether or not to have an abortion is often not a “choice” at all. Options are either
(a) have an abortion or
(b) have a child you are not prepared to raise, emotionally or financially. Either be a single mother and face all the social stigma associated with that, put your own life on the back burner while you raise a kid in a culture with little support for single mothers (eg drop out of school, get a poorly-paying dead-end job, go on welfare); or else rely on a man you may not love or be prepared to rely on, to help you.
Until such time as the “choice” to have a child on your own allows you to pursue the life that you WANT to, it’s not really a choice at all.
The point that “no feminist can be pro-life” is based on the reasoning that the pro-life (ie no abortions for anyone) stance will as often as not put a woman with an unwanted child into a position of financial dependance and social stigma.
The point that “feminists can be pro-life” is (I assume) based on the assumption that that the life of the child is worth more than all the negatives that will accrue to the mother. I believe that this is the point of contention.
Not to drag this thread to Cuba, but to say that a pro-life woman can only be a feminist if she is onboard with other women having the option to abort their unborn children if they deem it useful or necessary is somewhat disingenuous. Feminist or not, from an arm’s length perspective, how is someone going to have an internally consistent moral philosophy about something as basic as the sanctity of the lives of unborn babies, and not want or otherwise militate (in some form or fashion) for their belief on this issue to be made law to prevent the perceived death of innocent life?
So now in order to be a feminist, one must agree with Roe v. Wade?
That will eliminate even more feminists than your requirement that feminists not be pro-life.
Well, I can see that there are plenty of other posters who agree with the whole abortion thing being a legal, ethical, medical, human rights and also feminist (but not exclusively) issue…
Maybe this can be laid to rest or brought to an abortion thread in great debates.
Still the ‘medical issue’ got me thinking about other feminist issues the parameters of which are also blurred like doctors performing carte blanche hysterectomies and caesarian sections all over the place without giving their patients the full benefit of the power of refusal. If the baby’s life is at risk is the mother’s right lessened/changed in some way? How can a pregnant mother and baby have equal rights in this situation? I’m not looking for answers on this one here - I don’t want to start another never-ending argument. I’m just saying that these are some important things for feminists to consider.
Also IMHO to be a feminist you simply have to be someone who ponders on what it means to be a woman, how your gender affects your experience in life and if you come across anything negative in this regard you try to change it. A feminist will also appreciate and acknowledge the good things about being a woman.
Things are changing but feminism is not defunct/ outmoded by any means. The very word ‘outmoded’ implies that feminism is merely a fashion whereas in reality it is something much more serious and important.
I am in my mid-twenties and am not ashamed to call myself a feminist even though I know the label has some negative associations for some people. Maybe this is another thing true feminists can try to change… 
Is this really happening? Are lots of doctors performing hysterectomies and c-sections without the informed consent of their patients? Do you have a cite for this?
I notice that no where in there do you mention adoption.
Feminism never operated that way. When women enjoyed the presumption that children belonged with the mother, not the father, feminists were fine with that. Sure you can cite some feminists who gave lip service to the idea of equality. But when you go to court or before the legislatures, feminists are there to preserve any inequality that benefits women.
Fathers who wanted equal custody rights had to organize themselves and go to court – so knock off the crap about feminists supporting equal choice, equality, etc.
As someone who has seen self-professed feminists in the workplace, I know what a lie it is to say they wanted equal rights and equal opportunity. They were perfectly fine with discriminating against men, creating hostile working environments against men, bashing men, etc. A great number of people associate feminism with anti-male attitudes. ashing for a very good reason.
Yes, imagine it. That’s better than proving it ever was that way.