Poll: Are you a feminist?

[The_Critic]

Um?

I believe men and Women are equal and that they should share the same rights and privileges.

But I also believe that men and women are built differently and are able to accomplish different tasks more efficiently.

I also think chivalry (holding the door, pulling out a chair) is important for a man to do, not as a sign of superiority but as a symbol of respect.

So I don't know? Am I a feminist? I would say no, but I do agree with a lot of their thought process.

 

[Hjalmar Fryklund]

I am for equal rights of all genders/sexes, and I don't really care what kind of ideological label that nets me in your eyes.

Of course, if that makes me a feminist/equalist/egalitarian/or-what-have-you in your eyes, feel free to refer to me as such. I will however hold that ideological labels are mostly useful for matters of association, rather than actual describers (is that a proper English word?) of what someone thinks.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

People making up their own definition isn't really the disease, it's a symptom. People have come to define it differently because the people that claim themselves Feminists do not typically live up to that definition. Essentially, the definition is outdated.

People misunderstand philosophy and social science all the time. I may call myself a Kantist while completely misunderstanding everything that Kant was saying. We don't need to re-write Kant to allow for my misinterpretation of it. The definition of feminism is fine.

 

[Moth_Monk]

Quite a few people in this thread don't seem to want to identify as a feminist because this is a "label" that can be misused or used against them. However is it not hard to organise movements and therefore social change if people can not agree to work under a common banner?

Captcha: lark about

Indeed...

 

[Twilight_guy]

Yes. I'm not part of any group or protest if that's what your asking, but I do strive to point out clearly sexist things and try to study the issues of gender equality.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

Definitions change all the time. Judging by the responses in this Thread, the definition has already changed. Thus the definition in dictionaries is outdated because that isn't how the word is typically used.

In other words, I'm not saying "change the definition!" but "the definition has changed, update the dictionaries!".

I understand your principle, but that isn't how it works, we can't just keep saying a word means X when it is constantly being used to say D, masses dictate to language, not the other way around.

I do understand that, but I'm hesitant to embrace an argument that there is a populist colloquial shift in people's use of the word "feminism". This forum, for example, is a terrible metric to use when determining understanding of feminist ideology, and even here you have a not insubstantial percentage of people embracing the dictionary definition.

We already have terminology like "radical feminism" that allows for an understanding that feminism contains splinter ideologies. This isn't a situation such as the one we face with the word "gay", where there has been an overwhelming re-appropriation of a word to the point where the original meaning is now a secondary definition. This is a case of people fundamentally misunderstanding the philosophy underpinning a social movement because of either a lack of education, or because they're in an environment like the Escapist where the dialogue around gender has become so polarized and aggressive that they react to everything coming out of "the other side" with knee jerk emotion.

 

[ToxicOranges]

"Feminism" as a term is not a great label.

"Equalist" fits far better. I want equality; I don't want a patriarchy or a matriarchy. I want gender equality, but I tend to hate most radical feminists who do nothing but invite further displeasure amongst most normal people. See Tumblr, as an example.

 

[Simskiller]

I'm not a feminist, as I prefer to call my self an equalist, believing in equal rights for everything (not just between the sexes but also for LGBT rights, etc).

Also feminism is kinda sexist towards men, with some people advocating more rights for women then for men, instead of true equal.

aaaaand ninja'd on my term.

 

[Kizi]

I don't call myself a feminist but I support equal rights.

Edit: Equalist. That's the word.

 

[MrBenSampson]

I want people to be treated equally, regardless of gender, race or sexuality. I don't think the term "feminist" represents that stance properly, so I don't claim to be one.

I treat everybody the same, meaning I take a moral stance against chivalry. I don't see any reason why I should hold doors open for women, just because they are women. If they're hands are full, of course I'll hold the door, but I would do the same for a man.

I know a lot of people who think that "equal opportunities" means hiring a bunch of tokens. No, it means that everyone has the same chance to get that job, without their gender, race or sexuality being considered.

 

[camazotz]

The few "feminists" I've had the displeasure of meeting committed Misandry quite openly. Apparently, men are the reason they became feminists.

One could argue that "men being the reason they became feminists" is as true a tautology as one can get.

(and I consider myself a feminist. I also have engaged in activities to promote feminism, some as radical as insuring my female employees are paid equal wages to male employees, and some as simple as participating in local advocacy groups and pointing out/combating mysoginy when I see it. And yes I am a male).

 

[Kahunaburger]

That however was the problem with Kahunaburger, he was trying to imply that what I said is incorrect, he cannot back that up.

Did you read the links? You might find those helpful.

 

[Vegan_Doodler]

I am not a feminist because I don't think focusing on the issues of one group of people is the way to equality. I also don't think that people are equal a lot of the time, people have different skill sets and capablties that might make them better suited for a task then the guy/girl next to them. Simple example, women make good surrogates, men make good sperm doners, wouldn't really work the other way round.

There are a lot of things I don't like about feminism in practice but the thing I hate is the same reason why I hate most established religions, they seem to have a monopoly on good, When talking to a lot of people who identify as feminist there seams to be this idea that 'I support equal rights so I am a feminist', the implication behind that statement being:
Is feminist = supports equal rights
Not feminist = hates women

Which is the same as saying:
Is Christian = Is a good person
Isn't Christian = Is in league with the devil.

I truly resent the idea that one group has the right way to go about things down to a T but anyone that think differently is for some reason wrong, or worse, the enemy.

And I don't understand why people consider feminism is for the equal opportunity of all, the clue is in the name FEMinism (I'm not trying to bash feminism here I just prefare to use extreme examples) It's like saying 'I'm sick of all this racial inequality, I'm going to focus on the issues of one group and have a name that indicates as such, 'White guys rule''

One last thing that's probably going to get me flamed to death but from what I can tell equality of the genders is a lot more complicated then people like to think. A woman might (I'd like to stress that part) be discriminated against not giving them equal footing for a job or drawing the attention of the less eloquent members of our hobby but on the flip side:
If the world was to go to war it would be men that are forced to kill other human beings in the name of people they will never meet,
On a sinking ship men would be expected to give up their seats for women and children,
If police are called to a domestic disturbance the man will get taken into custody for 12 hours, (even though statistically women are far more likely to be violent).

Men and women have different issues that need to be sorted out, focusing on one isn't the best way to go about it.

 

[Kahunaburger]

That however was the problem with Kahunaburger, he was trying to imply that what I said is incorrect, he cannot back that up.

Did you read the links? You might find those helpful.

Did you? Because if you did, you might have figured out that they have no bearing on what I said. Or you know, you could have just read the part of the post you quoted that explained precisely why they have no bearing.

Well, if you want to make up your own definitions for "sex" and "gender" and get angry at anyone who points you to the actual definitions (particularly as they apply to transsexual people) that is certainly something you can do. It doesn't strike me as a particularly productive thing to do if you want to have conversations with people not yourself, tho

 

[Xanadu84]

Radical feminism isn't about wanting gender inequality, it wouldn't be feminism if it was.

It's about what it believes to be the underlying cause of existing inequality.

OTHO, it, and every other of the many forms of feminism around, has been misrepresented as being about oppressing men by people who don't want the genders to nbe equal.

Ah, the old no true scotsman fallacy... "I disagree with your contextualized definition of a term, therefor you are wrong".

As opposed to the straw-man fallacy, where you impose a contextualized definition on a philosophy so that is easy to dismiss?

The problem here seems to be that no matter what objective definition you want to apply to feminism, you can reasonably be accused of commiting a falacy.
Usually, its the fallacy that best supports the argument of the person accusing someone of commiting the falacy.


This is a problem that seems to derail many conversations. If you define feminism as man-hating, feminism is bad. If you define it as purely equal rights, feminism is generally good. In the end, peoples philosophies are their own, and they use their own judgement to determine what they identify themselves as. And regardless of the philosophy, SOMEONE will find a bad application of the philosophy, and even more will identify with a philosophy even though they take it to an extreme that should exclude them. So how about this: Feminism is a broad philosophy, with views which all share the common thread that women are treated as having lesser value then men in some ways, and that we should return power to women. This means it can include varied, contradictory viewpoints, ranging from the woman from many years ago believing that women should be able to vote, but that owning property is taking it just a tad bit too far, to a modern day feminist who believes in equal pay for equal work and that certain stereotypes are ultimately harmful, all the way up to those (much smaller a minority then some will admit) who think that women are inherently superior to men, and deserve rights that reflect that. Therefore, feminism isn't bad. Bad feminism is bad.

What you've described is egalitarianism with a humanist twist, actually - though feminism can potentially compliment egalitarianism.

Feminism is to Egalitarianism as square is to rectangle. That seems reasonable.