I’m a feminist, and not the least bit anti-male. Actually, looking down, I see that I am male.
Take any name, say it with a sneering tone, and some folks will be silly enough to think that there is something wrong with not only that name, but also something wrong with persons who associate with that name. The bigots do this to put people whom they do not like on the defensive.
I say wear the badge with confidence and determination, rather than hide what you are. Don’t be put on the defensive.
I don’t subscribe to the contemporary movement as I’ve seen it. With liberation from enforced traditional roles comes a little fact that quite a few feminists tend to ignore: procreation is a choice. You contribute genetic material to the kid, it should be your problem, not your employer’s. I vehemently oppose government-mandated leave (another thread mentioned that Canada provides for a year off at over half pay with a guaranteed return to the job!), though if the employers opt to provide such things uncoerced (out of kindness, or beliefs, or simply to retain valuable employees in the long term) it’s their prerogative.
Bravo, LinusK, bravo.
A great skewering of another trainwreck of a thread and a pretty good refutation of all the “feminist” crap in this one.
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
DianaG, I apologize for my explosion earlier. I’m not trying to make excuses, but it’s been a trying day, and yes, I was triggered by memories of all those other folks and how they treated me, not by you specifically. At heart, I think you and I agree on all the things that matter in this debate save the labels we use for ourselves. I hope you can forgive me for my heated choice of words.
[/QUOTE]
Understood, and forgiven.
Especially if there’s pot roast. 
For what it’s worth, in addition to thinking the term feminist has negative connotations, it also seems somewhat outdated to me, kind of like saying suffragette (is that even spelled correctly?). This is speaking from strictly a Western perspective, however. I think in other parts of the world, this is certainly a more front-and-center issue; however, it doesn’t seem like there’s a huge body of people who are vehemently anti-women’s rights in the U.S. anymore. Yes, there are certainly some; however, it doesn’t seem to be as strictly separated as it used to be.
Just my observation, of course.
[QUOTE=DianaG]
Understood, and forgiven.
Especially if there’s pot roast.
[/QUOTE]
Hey, if I can get off this computer, there may even be homemade (low-fat) chocolate silk pie! 
Thank you.
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
But if I say, “I’m a feminist” and other people hear, “I’m a hairy man-hating lesbian, let’s trash-talk men for the next hour,” they’re not going to listen to another word I say. Much like, I’m ashamed to admit, I couldn’t (wouldn’t) hear DianaG for a few hours this afternoon. I’m glad I got over it, but my experience is that saying, “I believe in equal rights and opportunities for all genders” is more productive and makes the conversation I want to have possible. I mean, who would disagree with that? Far, far fewer people than will clamp their ears shut when they hear the word “feminist”.
[/quote]
When you say that to the Rush listener who believes feminism means feminazism, won’t he just say you want co-ed bathrooms or something? It’s just the same as those who think Liberal is an evil word think all liberals are socialists.
Political correctness is about not using perfectly good words for fear of offending people. This is keeping a perfectly good word from becoming a bad one. I agree that humanism includes feminism, but it means a lot of other things also. I’ve never thought of feminism as being exclusive, any more than being anti-anti-Semitic is exclusive or anti-bigotry against any group is exclusive. It only becomes a problem if someone buys into the proposition that being for equal rights for women or any other group means being against equal rights for other groups. That’s why not ceding control of language is important, even though your position is the same no matter what you call yourself.
[QUOTE=cowgirl]
Call me a feminazi.
Bring it on. Back it up.* (There should be plenty of material among my thousands of posts here.)
And then we can decide who’s ignorant and judgmental.
As it happens, I like women who are feminists, in the “independent woman who wants equal rights” sense; but that’s not what the word feminist means to most people. I don’t like most of the women I’ve met who call themselves feminists, however; the two aren’t the same at all.
[QUOTE=Maureen]
I wonder why that could be? Is it possible that that’s they way feminists have been painted in order to discredit the movement and cast an unflattering light on women who want equality between the sexes?
[/quote]
To a degree. But they’ve also done a lot of damage to themselves. And as pointed out, the moderate feminists did little if anything to counter that perception.
[QUOTE=Maureen]
Saying all or even the vast majority of feminists are “greedy, humorless, vicious and unpleasant people” is like saying all atheists are shrill, unethical, disrespectful jerks intent on stamping out the moral foundation of civilization. And yet, it’s considered a statement of fact. It’s sad that the fringe element is that which gets all the attention, but y’know…squeaky wheel gets the grease.
[/QUOTE]
Do you have any evidence that the Andrea Dworkins and Gloria Steinems, and Gloria Allreds were/are “fringe” ? “Feminist” doesn’t make me think of an agitator for equal rights; it makes me think of the sort of woman who lies men into prison for rape and is proud of it, who thinks sex is bad, who thinks men should not have erections, who thinks “men are all rapists and that’s all they are”, that “of course he’s a molestor; he’s a father”, that women should be firefighters even if they can’t do the job and it kills people, whose sense of humor is restricted to jokes about castration.
[QUOTE=Staggerlee]
Isn’t the negative perception a good reason to declare oneself a feminist? In the same way that moderate Muslims should be vocal against Islamist terror acts and American Christians should show themselves as more reasonable than the Fred Phelpses of the world?
[/QUOTE]
If you are willing to start in/participate in a political movement, yes. If you don’t want to go through that level of aggravation and effort to rehabilitate a word, then no.
[QUOTE=Cat Fight]
Feminist guys are hot.
[/QUOTE]
Define “feminist guy”. Do you mean the sort who talks about how men are all pigs, how women are better than men, how men are all rapists and thugs ?
[QUOTE=xtisme]
I remember reading something about female circumcision once that always haunted me. It was a mother talking about growing up in a village who practiced this (barbaric…I’m not very culturally understanding about this) rite. What she was saying was that it was the women who enforced this rite…and that the enculturalization was such that even small girls WANTED to have this done to them so they could be like all the other women. She was saying that she had this done to her, but that she didn’t want it for her little daughter…but that her daughter was begging her mother to let her have it done so she wouldn’t be different. I’ll give you one guess as to who’s idea (of which sex) this mutilation was ORIGINALLY though.
[/QUOTE]
Women, most likely. Suppressing the sexuality of other females is of evolutionary benefit to women; it lowers the availability of female sex, and increases it’s value. And it’s something you see in the animal world as well. Infibulation ( sewing or otherwise sealing a woman shut ) is more likely to have been a male idea ( and which also has animal parallels ); men just don’t have an evolutionary incentive to kill the female sex drive. Women do.
[QUOTE=Evil Captor]
So, Der Trihs, are you a liberal? Perhaps even a radical?
[/QUOTE]
Most who know me think so.
[QUOTE=Mosier]
Is it just me, or do any other guys feel like we’re almost constantly under attack by women like the original poster?
[/QUOTE]
Same here.
[QUOTE=Voyager]
Perhaps you should stop calling yourself an atheist, then, since some lame-brained people consider atheist immoral baby-killing god haters.
[/quote]
Why ? They’ll hate me anyway. And I don’t care what people think of me, unlike the OP. If I did, I’d probably be one of those people who calls himself an agnostic,or makes vague pro-religious pronouncements to fit in.
[QUOTE=Voyager]
Why should anyone not call him or herself what they are because of what other people think?
[/QUOTE]
Because the official meaning of a word is not the same as the practical one. “Feminist”, in practical terms, does NOT mean someone who wants equal rights, and will not be heard as that by most people. It means “man hater” and “give goodies to women no matter who gets hurt”.
[QUOTE=LinusK]
The bottom line is we need to get past the idea that there are differences between men and women. Gender, after all, is a socially constructed category, not a natural one. We’re all the same.
It’s time to get past the stereotypes imposed by patriarchy: that women enjoy shopping, for example, or clothes, or that they’re not as sexually aggressive as men.
[/QUOTE]
No, all the evidence is that we are as different or more so than we appear. And there’s nothing wrong in being different, and one can learn to tolerate and like other people without pretending we are identical.
And I find this “tolerance” of the left that can only tolerate others by pretending that there are no differences to tolerate rather creepy. And an example of moral cowardice; it’s not hard to tolerate something that doesn’t exist.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Do you have any evidence that the Andrea Dworkins and Gloria Steinems, and Gloria Allreds were/are “fringe” ?
[/quote]
Do I have any proof that the majority of feminists (I am including women who live by feminist principles, even though they don’t call themselves “feminists”) are not man-hating, evil unconscionable bitches who’ll castrate you as soon as look at you? No, I haven’t figured out how to prove a negative yet, sorry. But going by my previous experience with the women in this thread that identify as “feminist”, I’d say that my hypothesis is more likely than yours, and you are quite possibly projecting your opinion of what you believe “feminist” to represent as fact.
Then I’d say the error lies with you. That’s certainly not what “Feminist” means.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
I"Feminist" doesn’t make me think of an agitator for equal rights; it makes me think of the sort of woman who lies men into prison for rape and is proud of it, who thinks sex is bad, who thinks men should not have erections, who thinks “men are all rapists and that’s all they are”, that “of course he’s a molestor; he’s a father”, that women should be firefighters even if they can’t do the job and it kills people, whose sense of humor is restricted to jokes about castration.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, *that * woman. I get ya.
Noooo, wait… I’ve never met that woman. Seriously. I have left the house and moved amongst the humans every day for thirtysomething years, and I have never ONCE met that woman. What the hell are you on about?
But what about feminists who believe that feminism has been co-opted, like Christina Hoff Sommers? A lot of people don’t buy into the whole all women are oppressed/all men are potentially rapists. I went to an all female college, and I didn’t like seeing this attitude. Around the spring, before “Take Back the Night” posters would go up telling us how many women have raped and abused and taken advantage of, and they’d stay up for the rest of the year. It really pissed me off, as well as most of my male friends, because I don’t think it’s a healthy attitude, to see feminism as how women are made weak by “evil men.”
[QUOTE=WhyNot]
You would not believe the world of shit I got from self labeled “feminists” in college who lectured, berated, laughed and stopped talking to me when I told them that I was looking forward to getting married, having kids and raising them myself, if I was lucky enough to find a husband who could support us on one income and had the same goals in mind. You would have thought I was proposing to have my feet bound.
[/quote]
I also hate the attitude that women judge other women for not being “feminist enough,” that WhyNot encountered. I mean, the OP talks about wanting to dress modestly to avoid the baser instincts of men. But I personally like dressing revealingly, attracting some male attention, looking cute, and yes, through painful means, obsessively removing as much body hair as I can. Does this mean I’ve bought into The Beauty Myth, as written about by Naomi Woolf?
[QUOTE=LinusK]
The bottom line is we need to get past the idea that there are differences between men and women. Gender, after all, is a socially constructed category, not a natural one. We’re all the same.
[/QUOTE]
Could you expound on this statement, particularly with respect to gender being a social construct?
I’m of the opinion that we really need to get past the idea that differences are bad - but I really do think that gender is a natural construct as much as it may be social. I also think that men and women are vastly different, and I’m glad we are.
OK, a lot to address. Apologies in advance, this post is going to jump around a lot.
I certainly hope so, but I am afraid that these guys in their 20s who treat women like jizz jars (good visual, I know) and assume that their opinions are silly and they don’t know anything worthwhile won’t grow up to respect women… Hell, I know a guy in his 30s whose opinion on gender roles is that if, by some strange chance, a woman feels really passionate about X, she should be able to choose to pursue a career in X. But honestly, how often does that happen, anyway, and everybody knows a woman’s place is in the home. :eek:
I absolutely agree much of the problem comes from the way children are socialized. Parents often perpetuate gender stereotypes simply because they don’t want their son to be picked on for taking gymnastics lessons. And unfortunately, it seems a lot more socially acceptable for a girl to be a tomboy than a boy to be a… sissy?
That’s one area I agree would have to be more frustrating for men than women. I was a proud tomboy as a kid. I climbed trees, I was into sports, I liked getting dirty. I eschewed anything remotely related to girly stuff until much later. Of course, I did love to cook and take care of babies, but for the first 12 years of my life I honestly believed there was some sort of mix-up during gestation and I really should have been a boy (not in a transgender way, though).
But for a boy to be interested in cooking or fashion, or to take dance lessons instead of play soccer, well… That’s like asking to spend your school years being beaten up and called a faggot.
Well, the three year old comment was about the time I bought my car… It was from a mechanic’s next door to my work, and the owner constantly dismissed what I had to say and talked down to me. He was probably 70, so maybe he never got used to the idea of an independent woman, but I kept expecting him to ask me where my husband was.
I’ll admit, my reluctance to go into the field does nothing to fight gender stereotypes. My father runs an A/C business, and I used to help him do installs when I was younger. Yeah, so my mother and sisters and I know more about HVAC than your average guy, guaranteed. I know that I can run copper and wire thermostats and install drain lines, but every time I went out on a job (which would be quite often in residential, less often on commercial jobs) I’d have to deal with that initial 5 minutes, or hour, or day of the men thinking “What the hell is SHE doing here?” It would be frustrating, to say the least. Now, it’s not the only thing keeping me from working in HVAC (my sensitive skin is rather annoyed by insulation, for starters) but it’s annoying when I occasionally think how I could put myself through school with no need for financial aid.
OK, there are more points I want to address, but they’ll have to wait.
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
Women, most likely. Suppressing the sexuality of other females is of evolutionary benefit to women; it lowers the availability of female sex, and increases it’s value. And it’s something you see in the animal world as well. Infibulation ( sewing or otherwise sealing a woman shut ) is more likely to have been a male idea ( and which also has animal parallels ); men just don’t have an evolutionary incentive to kill the female sex drive. Women do.
[/QUOTE]
Highly doubtful bordering on the ludicrous. What do you base this on? Afaik, its only in male dominated patriarchal societies that female circumcision is practiced. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
-XT
[QUOTE=DianaG]
Oh, *that * woman. I get ya.
Noooo, wait… I’ve never met that woman. Seriously. I have left the house and moved amongst the humans every day for thirtysomething years, and I have never ONCE met that woman. What the hell are you on about?
[/QUOTE]
Neither have I. But you see cartoons of her on sexist programs. If even one loudmouth says something stupid, the enemies of equality are going to focus on that as mainstream. I’d rather have a definition mean what the majority of the proponents of the position think.
I bet he’d be unhappy if atheism came to mean church-burning religion banning hatred, just because one nutzo had that position.
[QUOTE=RedRosesForMe]
Well, the three year old comment was about the time I bought my car… It was from a mechanic’s next door to my work, and the owner constantly dismissed what I had to say and talked down to me. He was probably 70, so maybe he never got used to the idea of an independent woman, but I kept expecting him to ask me where my husband was.
[/QUOTE]
The problem is he probably has to talk to most women like this, so you do have some responsibility to let him know that you have some interest (most important) and understanding about the topic.
I find it always helps to consider things from other peoples’ points of view.
[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
The problem is he probably has to talk to most women like this, so you do have some responsibility to let him know that you have some interest (most important) and understanding about the topic.
I find it always helps to consider things from other peoples’ points of view.
[/QUOTE]
We never talked about the inner workings of the vehicle, I did that with the mechanics who had actually opened the hood and had a look at the thing. I only spoke to him about actually purchasing the vehicle, and the only technical aspects of that are about signing contracts and payment plans, something someone’s who’s ever bought a cell phone or had a credit card would know about. He just had an air about him- “Don’t bother your pretty little head about it, you wouldn’t understand anyway, just let the men sort it out.”
He just talked down to me, literally like I was a small child that had limited faculties, in that slow, patient voice like he was explaining something to a toddler.
“Now, I’m going to sign here to release the lien, do you know what that means?” He actually said that. In that voice. I highly doubt if I were a young man instead of a young woman he would have asked that question in that tone of voice.
[QUOTE=RedRosesForMe]
We never talked about the inner workings of the vehicle, I did that with the mechanics who had actually opened the hood and had a look at the thing. I only spoke to him about actually purchasing the vehicle, and the only technical aspects of that are about signing contracts and payment plans, something someone’s who’s ever bought a cell phone or had a credit card would know about. He just had an air about him- “Don’t bother your pretty little head about it, you wouldn’t understand anyway, just let the men sort it out.”
He just talked down to me, literally like I was a small child that had limited faculties, in that slow, patient voice like he was explaining something to a toddler.
“Now, I’m going to sign here to release the lien, do you know what that means?” He actually said that. In that voice. I highly doubt if I were a young man instead of a young woman he would have asked that question in that tone of voice.
[/QUOTE]
Ah, I didn’t quite grasp the circumstances.
You should have kicked him in the testicles, and he wouldn’t have fought back against a lady 
[QUOTE=Small British Shop Owner]
The problem is he probably has to talk to most women like this, so you do have some responsibility to let him know that you have some interest (most important) and understanding about the topic.
I find it always helps to consider things from other peoples’ points of view.
[/QUOTE]
There is an interesting section in Blink by Malcolm Gladwell about a used car dealer who did very, very well by not prejudging customers. One was a guy who looked like a real hick farmer, and who was ignored by most of the dealers. It turned out he had a lot of money and bought a lot of cars, all from this person.
As a personal example of what RedRosesForMe said, my wife was going around the country in an RV with our kids for a book. She went to a number of RV dealers and got ignored. Finally I went with her and the salesman paid attention, despite the fact she had done the research and I didn’t give a crap about the RV. (And she did all the talking, once she got someone to listen to her.) Someone working with the public should not force a potential customer to prove she is real.
People who do this deserve to lose their jobs or their businesses. You might talk to someone and see he isn’t buying, but that’s different from prejudging.
I think I’d call myself a feminist. I think that people are people, regardless of age, creed, gender, or orientation. Of course, maybe that makes me a humanist.
Anywhoot, sexism is a lot like racism. We’re making some progress in both fronts, but I still see and hear things contrary to that. I think that the tonic for the problem, and it’s the lazy way out, is time. Eventually, rich old white guys will die off and some different people are going to leak in. Hopefully, race and skin color will be simply be an identifier instead of a way to distance one group of people from another.