Just to push this point further, it would be perfectly possible and logically consistent to argue that women are less intelligent, morally inferior and worse-dressed than men, and *still* to say they deserve equal rights! Hell, some people are campaigning for equal rights for chimpanzees.bushwhacker2k said:Flatfrog said:It does seem that way, doesn't it?
This seems self-contradictory. Surely if you're judging people individually (a sentiment I heartily agree with) then you shouldn't be judging how annoying a 'group' is and deciding whether to support 'them'. For example, who is 'them' in the case of 'feminists'? There are loads of feminist thinkers out there, and each of them makes some good points and some bad ones. And beyond them there is the huge array of people, male and female, who consider themselves feminist and have never done anything to annoy you personally.Ganthrinor said:
To be honest, I never gave much thought to paternity leave before, but I think they're just as entitled as woman. It is their child after all. I'm not entirely sure how much leave women get, but men should be offered an equal amount. Both have the right to refuse it or have shorter leave, do they not? If not, I think they should.SenseOfTumour said:
Good point, but then they're actually being judged on their suitability for the job, which is really how it should be anyway. The black agent isn't being denied a job because they're black, it's because they would absolutely not be right for the job. This is why I find it incredibly annoying whenever I hear a study of someone being denied a job, or something, and then playing some kind of 'I'm being discriminated against just because I'm X' card. No, you just aren't a good choicemoretimethansense said:
It's a very general description of it. I didn't think anyone would read it if I branched off into Essentialist and non-essentialist feminist postitions or the gender vs. sex debate. I gave it in a really bare sense because, to be honest, I didn't think too many people would be interested.DasUberCow said:
That's not feminism though, I'm totally opposed to employing women just for the sake of them being women. Women need to earn their place, just as much as men.Frybird said:
Not necessarily, it did in the 70s when it started but from the 90s there has been a movement away from politically motivated feminism.Bill Bread said:
I'm a male who chose "no" and I did read the whole post. I consider myself, like so many others here, an "equalist" or "humanist." I chose no because I cannot bring myself to use the label "feminist". I think the label itself is sexist and demeaning, thanks to the vocal radical feminists who have co-opted the term over the years.Denamic said:
What he said. I believe in equality, but I'm not going to make any picket signs.stinkychops said:
Would you describe yourself as one.Dismal purple said:
I said I was a liberal feminist, mostly anti-essentialist but that's because I don't know enough on the essentialist side. The point of the poll was to ask if people would consider themselves one, the point of the OP was to start some kind of discussion.varulfic said:
How does it marginalise men? Are you talking about a particular faction or "feminists" as a whole?Generic Gamer said:
