Suhi89 said:
I don't see it as a problem because I'm not arguing against feminism in general, I'm pointing out that there is a least part of the feminist movements that is explicitly anti-male. I don't hold that against mainstream feminism, but the post I was replying to claimed that the Venn diagram for men's issues and issues feminism cares about overlap completely.
The problem I have with the argument that men who have problems should turn to feminism is that it doesn't usually help them in their situation. If their victims of domestic abuse, it won't help them to read those quotes above. If they try to post their problems on somewhere like r/feminism, they're likely to get shouted down or banned. Feminist organisations such as Women's Aid campaign against giving more resources to male victims of DV (probably because they're scared that the resources for those victims will come from their own funding).
So again, I'm behind feminism, I think it's goals are good but I think any help that it brings to men is as a side effect rather than a major goal and it's unhelpful to tell men who need help that feminism is the answer.
In terms of contemporary feminists, the only feminists I read are either on forums like this one or above the line on websites like the Guardian. I find them to be a mixed bag. Some come across as at the very least hostile to men, whereas others I agree with almost completely.
I'd be happy to check out any suggestions you'd like to make.
But you are arguing against feminism in general by using one small group of women, a group of women that label themselves as radical feminists, as a reason to stay away from an entire movement. You say that it wouldn't help men to read those quotes and I'm trying to think of a situation where those quotes would even come up. They aren't huge talking points in feminist circles. And honestly the only time I see them brought up is when someone needs an example of an "anti-male" feminist. They don't point to what self described feminists have said to them. They don't point to contemporary feminist writings. At the very least point to places where someone is actually likely to meet an anti male feminist so that folks can know where to avoid.
There is a reason why there are "waves" within feminism. As a movement it has evolved and grown, and it is evolving and growing right now, because it is in no way perfect. How could it be? It is made up of individuals who all have their own biases and prejudices despite a common goal. People on certain parts of the internet seem to imagine an us vs them situation. That its women vs men, feminists vs mras. But that is a false image, and only a part of the arguments had. A feminist is more likely to start a heated argument with another feminist over ways that the movement can improve than anything else.
As a movement it is not something that has one source because as a movement it is predicated on the idea that the sexes should be treated equally both in their social interactions and under the law. And that idea is not an idea that only sprung up in the minds of White middle class women in the 19th century just because they wanted to vote, and spread to the rest of the world from there. But that is, at least in the mainstream consciousness of the Western world, what people boil feminism down to. And as such it is no surprise to me that people turn to those individuals for an example of what feminism is and become disappointed. It's no surprise to me because they are only getting a part of the picture.
For example, what would be considered the first wave of feminism was incredibly racist and classist. (The second wave was a bit better but still had its failings.) Any black person would be turned off by select quotes from that time period. Then again, people don't often consider Sojourner Truth when they consider the fight for women's rights despite her own writings. Folks
may remember Ida B. Wells' name, but even though she fought for suffrage her name doesn?t come up that often. Ida, like a lot of Black female leaders around her time, fought for woman's rights, as well as civil rights (Wells in particular led the charge against lynching). But they also had to fight against White feminists, because some of them were all too ready to label Black men as rapists and animals. Especially after Black men were ?granted" the limited right to vote before White women were. While fighting against sexual violence some White feminists were perpetuating a sort of sexual violence. They were ready to falsely accuse Black men for rape,leading to the death and imprisonment of many black men, but unwilling to address how often Black women and men were raped during slavery. Even now women who aren't White, straight, cis gendered ,or able bodied have clashes with contemporary feminism, but they don't let that stop them from creating their own feminist literature and spaces. From from reforming spaces that are hostile to them. Or from encouraging others to join the movement. The most they do is warn folks of where to avoid if they don't want to put in the painstaking work of reforming the space.
I won't say that feminism can solve all of men's problems because I don't believe that. Men will have to work towards solving a lot of their own problems simply because they know the impact of their problems the best. But where men's and women's problems intersect, like gender roles, feminism is already addressing those problems. So it makes little sense for men to be completely detached from the movement. Which is what I think that Harpalyce was getting at. I have never seen a man get shouted down in feminist spaces for talking about their own abuse. I've seen it happen for minimizing the abuse that women receive, but never for just sharing stories about their life. I'm gonna assume that its not something that you've seen that often either since you use the term ?likely? with your r/feminism example. The most I can imagine is the questions being redirected to the r/masculism subreddit, but that would only to keep a topic on track. (and since reddit was mentioned most of the feminists subreddits link to each other. So if you've found one you've found them all) For instance,there are limits to talking about sexual assault in a gender neutral way. Women are more likely to be blamed for their assault. While men are more likely to be told that they weren't assaulted at all. Jumping back and forth between two situations won't encourage a productive discussion because the focus is split. Separating the discussion will also discourage oppression olympics. Which is part of why this topic is doing a much better job at discussing men's problems than what normally happens on this board (when a thread is started about women's issues and folks try to shift the focus to men).
