Poll: Are you a feminist?

[repeating integers]

@moopig66: You forgot the most important part for any story Michael Bay is involved in: Huuge Explosions.


ON topic:
I shall just leave this here:
http://thefemitheist.blogspot.de/2012/04/allow-me-to-introduce-myself.html

wow. My mind is actually blown. That is impressive in it's ignorance and pure hate.

maybe it's written by the same nice lady father_time linked to.

the one that the only mercy she can give men is to kill them quickly :/

You kids who don't recognise satire are so adorable

Again, she has (scarily) been proven either real or insanely dedicated to the cause. Check my post on it from a couple pages back.

 

[MammothBlade]

No, I can't rightly say that I'm "feminist" because I'm an egalitarian. Feminism implies favouring female rights - and when men and women are completely equal legally, such a term could be used to the detriment of males. Egalitarianism should champion the rights of neither sex over the other, and grant no special privileges or recompense for past wrongs. Only the present and future matter.

Bro did you read the damn definition of the word? For once i agree with movie bob, you cant just shut your eyes and pretend that the last 1000 years of history never happened. Its Feminist not egalitarian because of the huge imbalance that has been the norm thought out so much of history.

Yes I DID read it. I support peoples' rights, not womens' rights or mens' rights in particular. If society is to progress to a truly equal state this needs to stop being about "feminism", but plain gender egalitarianism. Otherwise it threatens to become about affirmative action and quotas and collective male guilt. History should be accepted and learnt from yet not used as a bargaining chip.

There is society. There are at least two genders. Each gender should be regarded as equal. The status quo should be equality and laws and services which deviate from that - existing or potential - should be considered unfair. There will always be a gender imbalance in many occupations, and this should not be suspect. Social gender organisation is not the problem. The issue is individual rights and not statistical imbalances. If a woman wants to study computer science (a male dominated subject), she should have equal expectations and receive the same quality of teaching as her male counterparts. Yet there should not be a requirement for computer science classes to implement quotas to address the lack of females who are interested in comp sci, for instance giving preference to female course applicants - this is fundamentally unjust and amounts to discrimination against males.

 

[lwm3398]

I am all for women's equality, and equality for everyone.

However, most feminist groups seem to want privilege for women, not equality. Therefore, I'm not a feminist.

 

[Folji]

If that's the real definition of feminism then boy I've really missed out on something. The only feminists I ever seem to come across aren't as much the ones going on about gender equality and gender role transparency as it's the ones dreaming of rebuilding modern society in an Amazonian image.

 

[Bocaj2000]

Men and Women are different! We think different, we act different, We are different. So you cannot measure set facts and really use them as evidence for women being out done in every way by men.

Example Pay, More men take the dangerous, undesirable work and generally favour connivance over comforts. Women the opposite generally going for comfort, easy commute, benefits etc. over money. And guess what because of that men get paid more on average. Of cause this is very generalised and of cause you will give cross overs, but for the Moriarty this is the case.

Men get shat on when it comes to devour and child custody.

And Women generally get less jail time than men for the same crimes.

So all in all I think the equal rights thing is done and does not need to go further, Well for the most part I feel it probably just needs to be balanced a bit to make it easier for the lesser downfalls on both sides.

One word: culture. It teaches women that dainty is desirable and it teaches men that being a badass is awesome. This isn't genetic.

Yes and No, A lot of it is environment but it is in our genetics that men protect women and women self preserve themselves. A woman who could get a man to do the hunting was the one who had the most viable babies. That is why it was/ is always women and children first men are seen as the disposable ones.

Only now things are less hostile. There are a lot more viable babies thinks to health, equality has drought men and women on to the same plane for better or worce. So now it seems to me while yes women should be able to vote also have to sigh up to any drafts for war if any come up.

What I do not get is if women are so oppressed why do they make up the largest consumer base?
And if women are paid so much less because of gender why do places not just employ women it makes sense they are paid less why pay more for a man?

Oppression is not decided upon by amount. That is silly.
As far was the wage gap, that is not because women by law are payed less; it is because of sexist bosses.

 

[ImperialSunlight]

Radical vs mainstream feminism, yes.

And as is the problem with any movement, the radicals are the ones most people think of when they hear the name of the group.
And thus arises the whole 'femnazi' problematic in the public conscious.

Okay, for the last time, radical feminism refers to a school of feminist thought that places responsibility for the oppression of women at the feet of a patriarchal social dynamic expressed in intra- and interpersonal interaction.

It has nothing to do with hating men.

Oh, no, but it is about hating any society including men. Essentially it holds that men having any power in society will inevitably lead to oppression. This implies a hatred or at least bias towards men as it usually does not have any problem with a primarily matriarchal society nor does it acknowledge that a man could ever do anything beneficial whatsoever, essentially characterizing them as mindless brutes who will always abuse their power, which is, of course, sexist and blatantly false.

 

[Epona]

Equality for women is an oxymoron. If only one group is considered, it's isn't about equality but preferential treatment.

 

[Wintermoot]

western feminists are more interested in portraying men as evil instead of helping women in the middle east that get stoned for getting raped. I support equal rights for humans regardless of gender/race/religion.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

I'm in favour of moving close to equal right, but it's not something that can happen completely as, and we need to get this into some people's heads, equal doesn't mean the same.

Men and women are different, and somethings are better suited to one gender. Therefore we're never going to have true equality, as, for instance, time off work for pregnancy.

Should men get any time off for the birth? If so, how long? if it's not the same as woman, then you couldd argue it's not equality, even tho that's obviously daft.

Personally, I blame capitalism in part, if we hadn't pushed women to feel like they had to work to be equal, we wouldn't have to the point where both partners in a relationship have to work to keep a roof over their heads.

I'm not saying women shouldn't work, I'm saying that go back even 50 years, and most couples had the man in work, and the woman running the home. (I'm more than happy for the roles to be reversed, it's just a shame we've pushed making money as more important than taking care of our young.)

Also, with unemployment high all over, perhaps it wouldn't be without both partners having to work. I believe the normalcy of both partners working has led to employers realising they don't have to pay decent wages to one person any more.

 

[Darkmantle]

I do not identify as a feminist. Mainly because there are so many branches of it and in my mind feminism is really just a bunch of up-tight prudes trying to kill everyone's fun. And I don't mean ''stopping men from pinching women's asses'', I mean ''trying to stop me from watching porn''. I could go on a diatribe that would rival a George R. R. Martin novel in length, but I will show mercy (and wisdom) and spare you all from that potential flame war.

So you have nothing to say regarding the stoning to death of women in some countries or the mutilation of women's genitals in some other countries then?

Where in the hell did this come from?

haven't you heard?

If you're not a feminist, you're a misogynist holocaust denying KKK clansmen who is indoctrinated by the extreme right and the patriarchy.

And yes, that's almost verbatim what I've been called in this thread by a few colourful individuals.

 

[Epona]

I'm in favour of moving close to equal right, but it's not something that can happen completely as, and we need to get this into some people's heads, equal doesn't mean the same.

Men and women are different, and somethings are better suited to one gender. Therefore we're never going to have true equality, as, for instance, time off work for pregnancy.

Should men get any time off for the birth? If so, how long? if it's not the same as woman, then you couldd argue it's not equality, even tho that's obviously daft.

Personally, I blame capitalism in part, if we hadn't pushed women to feel like they had to work to be equal, we wouldn't have to the point where both partners in a relationship have to work to keep a roof over their heads.

I'm not saying women shouldn't work, I'm saying that go back even 50 years, and most couples had the man in work, and the woman running the home. (I'm more than happy for the roles to be reversed, it's just a shame we've pushed making money as more important than taking care of our young.)

Also, with unemployment high all over, perhaps it wouldn't be without both partners having to work. I believe the normalcy of both partners working has led to employers realising they don't have to pay decent wages to one person any more.

You're blaming Capitalism for women being pushed into the workforce? You should be blaming the feminist movement for that. They are the ones who pushed women out of the home and into the workforce with the promise that women can have it all. Capitalism adapted by lowering wages and raising prices so that now two incomes are needed.

 

[Phasmal]

I'm in favour of moving close to equal right, but it's not something that can happen completely as, and we need to get this into some people's heads, equal doesn't mean the same.

Men and women are different, and somethings are better suited to one gender. Therefore we're never going to have true equality, as, for instance, time off work for pregnancy.

Should men get any time off for the birth? If so, how long? if it's not the same as woman, then you couldd argue it's not equality, even tho that's obviously daft.

Personally, I blame capitalism in part, if we hadn't pushed women to feel like they had to work to be equal, we wouldn't have to the point where both partners in a relationship have to work to keep a roof over their heads.

I'm not saying women shouldn't work, I'm saying that go back even 50 years, and most couples had the man in work, and the woman running the home. (I'm more than happy for the roles to be reversed, it's just a shame we've pushed making money as more important than taking care of our young.)

Also, with unemployment high all over, perhaps it wouldn't be without both partners having to work. I believe the normalcy of both partners working has led to employers realising they don't have to pay decent wages to one person any more.

You're blaming Capitalism for women being pushed into the workforce? You should be blaming the feminist movement for that. They are the ones who pushed women out of the home and into the workforce with the promise that women can have it all. Capitalism adapted by lowering wages and raising prices so that now two incomes are needed.

Why are you talking about women working like it's a bad thing?
This `having it all` thing is silly. It's about having a choice. Not `it all`, whatever the fuck that is.

 

[Epona]

I'm in favour of moving close to equal right, but it's not something that can happen completely as, and we need to get this into some people's heads, equal doesn't mean the same.

Men and women are different, and somethings are better suited to one gender. Therefore we're never going to have true equality, as, for instance, time off work for pregnancy.

Should men get any time off for the birth? If so, how long? if it's not the same as woman, then you couldd argue it's not equality, even tho that's obviously daft.

Personally, I blame capitalism in part, if we hadn't pushed women to feel like they had to work to be equal, we wouldn't have to the point where both partners in a relationship have to work to keep a roof over their heads.

I'm not saying women shouldn't work, I'm saying that go back even 50 years, and most couples had the man in work, and the woman running the home. (I'm more than happy for the roles to be reversed, it's just a shame we've pushed making money as more important than taking care of our young.)

Also, with unemployment high all over, perhaps it wouldn't be without both partners having to work. I believe the normalcy of both partners working has led to employers realising they don't have to pay decent wages to one person any more.

You're blaming Capitalism for women being pushed into the workforce? You should be blaming the feminist movement for that. They are the ones who pushed women out of the home and into the workforce with the promise that women can have it all. Capitalism adapted by lowering wages and raising prices so that now two incomes are needed.

Why are you talking about women working like it's a bad thing?
This `having it all` thing is silly. It's about having a choice. Not `it all`, whatever the fuck that is.

I was responding to a poster who said that. Only that poster blamed Capitalism and I am telling him where the blame, if any, lies.

I know that it's silly to think you can have it all but alot of women believed that. I personally welcome a reversal of roles, let women work and let men tend to the children.

 

[Phasmal]

I was responding to a poster who said that. Only that poster blamed Capitalism and I am telling him where the blame, if any, lies.

I know that it's silly to think you can have it all but alot of women believed that. I personally welcome a reversal of roles, let women work and let men tend to the children.

I'm just wondering what `it all` is supposed to mean, anyway.
You can't have work and a family life, maybe? But that's silly, because people do.

Anyway, I'd rather both parents work.
Because I'm an out of work nursery worker and we gotta make money somehow.

 

[Beliyal]

This thread is (mostly) men arguing (mostly) men about women's rights.

What's worse, this thread is (mostly) men who have skewed opinions of feminism and have (mostly) never been discriminated against in their lives arguing (mostly) men who somewhat understand what feminism is and keep using flawed arguments to explain their opinions about women's rights.

This very thread is the proof of feminism still being very much needed in our society.

How?

Well, it shows men exhibiting the fear of women taking their power and privileges by not understanding what feminism is and the context of historical background and social inequalities regarding women and their rights.

Now, please, I used the term "men" here only because I refer to this thread specifically and to men participating in it who exhibited what I said above (I haven't checked the gender of all participants, but I can't say I've seen female users saying that feminism is the boogeyman that teaches women to hate men. I know there are women like that, but in this thread, they would be a minority, due to the overall demographics of the Escapist).

I am very sad to see people disregarding and misinterpreting something that has brought only positive changes to society. I am also sad that the vocal minority who doesn't understand what feminism is but calls themselves feminists are what people are most familiar with. To get this straight; being a feminist means being in favour for each human being treated equally, regardless of their sex. It's called "feminism" (emphasis on women) because throughout history, women were the gender that was systematically discriminated against and neglected in all aspects of society, so it was women who had to be brought on the same level as men. Today, women are mostly equal to men, though not in the entire world and there are still things that we need to work on, however petty or insignificant they may seem. Whatever injustice men suffer because women are slowly coming to equality is not due to feminism, but due to the society that made feminism needed (that's still making it needed). I firmly believe in fighting for rights of both sexes to be equal in everything and I firmly believe that hurting the rights of men hurts the rights of women and vice versa. That's feminism. Whoever says they're a feminist and proceeds to talk about men as lesser or non-important beings is not a feminist. That person in only uneducated and delusional. Therefore, we need people who understand what feminism really is and who will continue to fight for equality until such is attained in the world. And yes, fighting for the equality of female characters in media may look petty, but it is important because humanity interacts and learns through media and society.

One more thing. Feminism doesn't exclude humanism; feminism is a part of humanism. As I stated in my previous post, you can't simply say that you will fight for the equality of all or that you want world peace. First, you must go piece by piece and solve smaller problems that are a part of a whole. Feminism, just as gay rights activism or animal rights activism or, if you wish, male rights activism, is a part of a whole, and the whole will be reached when we put all those parts together, piece by piece.

 

[Epona]

I was responding to a poster who said that. Only that poster blamed Capitalism and I am telling him where the blame, if any, lies.

I know that it's silly to think you can have it all but alot of women believed that. I personally welcome a reversal of roles, let women work and let men tend to the children.

I'm just wondering what `it all` is supposed to mean, anyway.
You can't have work and a family life, maybe? But that's silly, because people do.

Anyway, I'd rather both parents work.
Because I'm an out of work nursery worker and we gotta make money somehow.

LOL, I can understand why you want both parents to work. Unemployment rates being what they are, I think it would be better if only one parent worked and they made a wage that could take care of a family of 4 1/2 (Mom, Dad and 2 1/2 kids..LOL).

Women were sold this bull that they could have a great career, great house, great car, etc... and be a great mother, single mother in many cases. Sorry, but things don't work that way. If you want a great career, you need to put in the hours and even take the work home with you sometimes. Men have always known this but women are finding out the hard way. It's why so many women are on anti-depressants I would bet.

 

[Phasmal]

LOL, I can understand why you want both parents to work. Unemployment rates being what they are, I think it would be better if only one parent worked and they made a wage that could take care of a family of 4 1/2 (Mom, Dad and 2 1/2 kids..LOL).

Women were sold this bull that they could have a great career, great house, great car, etc... and be a great mother, single mother in many cases. Sorry, but things don't work that way. If you want a great career, you need to put in the hours and even take the work home with you sometimes. Men have always known this but women are finding out the hard way. It's why so many women are on anti-depressants I would bet.

Loads of dudes manage to work and not be shit dads. Ladies manage it too.
Single mums is a totally different thing, I had a single parent household and cause of fucked-up benefits, it was better for her not to work, seeing as she got no child support. (And also because of a scary situation where she was at work and I managed to fall down the stairs and brain myself, which was nobody's fault but mine).

Boyfriend's parents worked his whole life and they're both awesome. People can `have it all` if they are willing to work hard. Some people cant cause of shitty situations, blaming feminism is just darn silly.

 

[Epona]

LOL, I can understand why you want both parents to work. Unemployment rates being what they are, I think it would be better if only one parent worked and they made a wage that could take care of a family of 4 1/2 (Mom, Dad and 2 1/2 kids..LOL).

Women were sold this bull that they could have a great career, great house, great car, etc... and be a great mother, single mother in many cases. Sorry, but things don't work that way. If you want a great career, you need to put in the hours and even take the work home with you sometimes. Men have always known this but women are finding out the hard way. It's why so many women are on anti-depressants I would bet.

Loads of dudes manage to work and not be shit dads. Ladies manage it too.
Single mums is a totally different thing, I had a single parent household and cause of fucked-up benefits, it was better for her not to work, seeing as she got no child support. (And also because of a scary situation where she was at work and I managed to fall down the stairs and brain myself, which was nobody's fault but mine).

Boyfriend's parents worked his whole life and they're both awesome. People can `have it all` if they are willing to work hard. Some people cant cause of shitty situations, blaming feminism is just darn silly.

Ok whatever, you explain why there are so many women on anti-depressants then.

 

[Phasmal]

Ok whatever, you explain why there are so many women on anti-depressants then.

Not sure what that has to do with women and working, but here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
It's a shame, I thought this conversation was reasonable, didn't realise you just wanna make assumptions.

 

[Epona]

Ok whatever, you explain why there are so many women on anti-depressants then.

Not sure what that has to do with women and working, but here you go.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation
It's a shame, I thought this conversation was reasonable, didn't realise you just wanna make assumptions.

So are you gonna to explain why women are so unhappy today?