People Against Feminism..

Honestly I think women are equal to men..u talked about objectifying women in advertisements and such but that's just trying to get profit from companies..I mean the most amount of people who play games are in fact male,and,as obvious as it is,most of them are sexually attracted to women.one would think that's so good way to attract someone's attention to play the game so the company gains profit from that.But let's talk about life in general,if a woman wants to be objectified well that's okay in my books.And the argument about payment doesn't really make sense to me if you think that statistically more women study in a university than men.One would logically say that these women will have a much better job than the majority of men.
I'm a person who thinks everyone should be equal and I think that feminism is getting irrelevant,unlike a long time ago when it was needed and played a major part in improving women's rights.

 

Feminism does actually try to support men as well as women: the key focus is on women,, yes, because we are unequal, but feminism also supports things such as: men being allowed to express their emotions without being considered weak, in addition to feminism's belief that women should be allowed to wear what they want without creepy fuckers in their 40s being obscene towards us. That's Westernised feminism, of course. Obviously women in Middle Eastern countries face much worse oppression, however, that doesn't mean that there is no problem in the West.

---------- Post added 12th May 2016 at 12:55 AM ----------

But I won't bite anyone's head off for not identifying with feminism, because I know full well that those STUPID Tumblr fascists have fucked it up for the rest of us. All I aim to do is demonstrate not only what feminism at it's core stands for (which is gender equality by the way), but also the experiences that women face in the real world. Men can bring up statistics all they want, but there is no substitute for experience.

 

Excuse me, what? Did you just try to say statistical evidence is irrelevant compared anecdotal evidence? Holy fucking shit. See, this is why people don't like feminism.

 

Statistics don't mean anything if you are experiencing discrimination. It doesn't matter how likely it is to happen. If it happens, then there is a problem.

 

Personally, I'm against 3rd-wave feminism because it's pointless and usually harmful.
Comments by feminists casually dehumanizing men and shaming masculinity made it 5000x harder for me to accept myself as trans, and I don't think it's productive to deny feminism has issues with misandry and false statistics (e.g. wage gap, 1/5 women are raped). Tumblr, Gamergate, and liberal arts colleges have all solidified my belief. What really matters is the belief in equality, not the label feminist. I truly don't understand why people care about the label so much. That said, I support feminists who truly do believe in gender equality, just not the movement as a whole in first world countries.

 

When I was younger I used to not be able to understand how anyone could be against feminism, because who could be against gender equality? Then I starting using the internet more and now I can see why it's less appealing than I thought. I am a feminist and I think that actual feminism- as in the kind that fights for gender equality- is a beneficial and necessary movement, mostly now in places that aren't in the West. But some people seem to have hijacked the movement, calling themselves feminists when really they're misandrists. These people are a minority but they are the loudest and most attention-grabbing, so some people think that all feminists are like that.
I will admit though that feminism should do more for men, especially when it comes to abuse against men. It's obviously not perfect, but thanks to both misandrists and misogynists, the word has become toxic and you can't even bring it up without creating a massive flame war that is just full of angry people not actually listening to each other.
In any case, you can't deny the good that feminism has done over the years. Without the people who fought for gender equality, I wouldn't be able to vote or control my own finances or have any sort of true independence. And it is clearly still needed, as there are countries that practice female genital mutilation, and then there's Saudi Arabia. But if people want to call themselves equalists instead of feminists, I don't really care. As long as we eventually have full gender equality across the world.

 

So if a man gets abused, regardless of the fact he is less likely to be abused than women*, are you saying there is a problem there?**

*In the UK, 1 in 3 women are abused and 1 in 7 men are abused. However, I think this number might be lower for both since both groups report less times than actually happens.
** I think there is an issue, especially since men are usually told to ''man up'' and other ''get over it'' phrases, when in reality being say physically abused and then emotionally abused in this way could cause more problems.

 

Yes, that is what I meant. I.e. that just because something is statistically less likely to happen doesn't mean it's not a problem when it does happen. And yes, under-reporting abuse/assault is a serious issue, among people of all genders.

My other point is that just because something is illegal doesn't mean there still isn't an issue surrounding it. Yes, it's illegal to discriminate on gender in the workplace, but it still happens and there is still cause to see it as an issue. It's not the issue it once was and it's great that we have laws against it, but laws are only a preventive to a certain degree. Laws get broken. And there need to be people who deal with it when it happens (that includes bringing visibility to it).

 

Sure, if you're experiencing discrimination you do something about i.e. call the police.

The conext I was using this in, and the way the person came off, was that "if I don't see it, it doesn't happen," which is some seriously flawed logic. That's when statistics come into play.

 

I have nothing against feminism, or rather I have nothing against what it use to be: the equality for all genders and sexes. Anything that puts everyone on an even ground is something that I am for.

But I'm not for what is commonly known for third wave feminism.
I'm not supportive of the feminist who exclude trans women and who put down trans men.
I am not supportive of feminist who say that women can hit men but that men should never hit a lady. First, no one should ever hit another person. 2) Equality means that if a woman hits a man he has the right to defend himself. And the opposite is true as well, if a man hits a woman she should defend herself.
I am not supportive of feminist who constantly blame men for every little problem and who often make comments about how all men should die.
Not fond of double standards some feminist put up.
The list can go on but the point has been gotten I am sure.

I've just had bad experiences with feminist in the past so I am wary of them, but that doesn't mean I am unsupportive of their original cause.

 

My god, Shadd, again, you're really cherry-picking what I say, aren't you? That is not what I was saying. Did you know that in the UK, LGB+ people legally have the same rights as straight people? Yes? Does homophobia still exist? Of course it fucking does. You're criticising me an awful lot, yet you're not listening to what women are telling you about our experiences!

And you say that I'm the one who refuses to listen to more than one side of an argument. Unbelieveable.

PS. Exactly, Libertino.

---------- Post added 12th May 2016 at 10:41 AM ----------

Honestly, same. I love feminism at it's core. What I don't love is all the bullshit that the radicals have added. I still refer to myself as a feminist because I believe in the original ideals, and I maintain that image of feminism. All I want is for all genders to be equal.

 

The problem I have with feminism is in the very definition itself that you gave:

"Feminism: the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes."

That, in itself, is a contradiction. You cannot focus on the rights of just one group and claim you want equality for all at the same time. Unless, of course, you believe women are the only ones who suffer the consequences of 'inequality of the sexes', which is simply not true.

There's nothing wrong with (primarily) focusing on women's rights, but then don't claim you aim for equality for all, because you don't. If you truly want equality, then it has to go both ways. Focusing on women's rights only implies you think men have it better in all aspects and they are never treated unequally. Like I said: that is simply not true.

There you go. My problem with feminism.

 

Don't read something that I didn't say please. I said access. And it's very much intertwined with bodily autonomy, because of the knock-on effects of various states legislation restrictions to abortion. Which I'll address in a bit.

Look at male-specific access to things that affect their sexual health, and their sex life. And then look at female-specific access. There's a discrepancy here. Unless I have a really good health plan, access to the pill (even for non-contraceptive purposes) is not covered. But viagra is in many of those same plans. That is what I mean by access. Where men's needs are outright better covered by society, while a woman's needs are an extra expense or tax.

Oh, and the essentials that women do need access to no matter what (tampons and pads) are taxed as a luxury good in states where sales tax is a thing. While Rogaine is not. Seriously? In some of these states, you can diaper your baby tax-free, but you have your monthly bodily function taxed.

And let's not forget that the closing of clinics under regulatory red makes access to certain non-abortion services even harder to get a hold of. So when you need access to health care that isn't covered, you have fewer places you can go to, which may mean you simply can't realistically do it.

On your abortion comment:

And Jim Crow laws didn't reverse the "right to vote" for black people, it just piled on so much bullcrap that it made it effectively impossible for black people to vote. Abortion provider restrictions place the same noose around access to abortion when it means no providers can operate in the state.

They also place restrictions on the woman to make it inconvenient enough for the woman (or in some causes, traumatic enough) to prevent the abortion from happening. Again, very much Jim Crow-esque to suppress abortion without directly violating Roe v Wade.

This is another oft-repeated trope that totally ignores the complexity of the issue. Seriously, go listen to that podcast before responding to what I'm about to say, because I won't go into the details here, Pamela really does the topic better justice than I can. And my own comment is: if this is normal in the research parts of STEM, it's no effing wonder that we don't encourage women to go in. You shouldn't need to belong to a survivor's group just to work in a field (especially in the small research fields).

The problem is many-fold, and I've seen many of these factors play out myself (being in the tech field). We encourage girls to do stereotypically feminine things, which depresses interest. When a girl does display interest, the family may attempt to correct the behavior. If not, she's now introduced to the utter shit storm that is the road into the field. By her peers and instructors as she works her way through the education side of things. If she somehow manages to get through this crap, she then faces biases at the hiring level, where her resume is more likely to get binned, strictly because of the name. Then, once you are in the job, you face those same biases that are in play that affect promotion rates, so you are more likely to wind up in a dead end position more often than your male peers, even if there is nothing all that different about your productivity or creativity.

And your comment about "just putting women in there" is supremely ignorant. These women wouldn't be there if they weren't interested, and if they weren't already putting up with more hazing, and other bullshit that their male peers don't even see. My team could hire every woman who put in a resume, and we'd still have a predominately white male team.

And to be blunt, these biases need to be part of how we address the problem (and visibility is one way to combat those biases), otherwise what we will be doing is generating more interest, while also exposing them to an experience that suggests they would have an easier time elsewhere.

But yes, interest is one factor here, and biases do play into why the interest is lacking.

While you can claim the patriarchy doesn't exist, it does. Lineage is passed down through the father in the US, value is placed on the masculine (and even to be a successful woman, you need to behave in a more masculine fashion). That is the description of the patriarchy in the nutshell. It is the set of values that affect how we pass down power from generation to generation, both within the household, and what traits we consider superior when we place value on both people and things. And those values, with gatekeepers that have power within the hierarchy to admit/dismiss others into that power structure is what creates the discrimination. And this social hierarchy in many ways is the root of all the various forms of stupid discrimination we see, including those that affect men.

Does patriarchy mean that men are always held in value over women in all contexts? No. I do see places where we treat people as disposable, which is its own problem, and men aren't immune from that form of classism. But an example of another form of discriminatory power structure doesn't mean that others can't exist.

 

That isn't really true. Primarily focusing on women's rights does not mean you do not aim for equality, because the advocacy of women's rights would then be about making sure women are equal, which is still striving for equality.

Fighting for women's rights could mean that you are simply specialized in your area. For example, does fighting for LGBT rights primarily mean that I don't care about women's rights or men's rights or the rights of immigrants or black people? You can fight for LGBT rights and still be "for equality". Same goes for women's rights.

 

^ My bad, what I meant to say was equality for all, men included. Edited.

Although, even without the 'for all', I doubt you'd really aim for true equality for women; probably only equality in ways that would be beneficial to them. (Just guessing here).

 

This is exactly what I think. I don't really know what else to say.

 

I do view myself as a feminist, but my ideals are different from the majority. Take arguments such as, women are oppressed because they are expected to take care of children and be mothers, etc. I feel that such arguments ignore the fact that a large percentage of women are perfectly happy to have children and they really do view their families as something that comes first. In fact, once you have children or even when you become an aunt or uncle, things change. Age influences our perception and we start seeing the world differently. All that matters are the children to the adults, their laughter, tears, hugs, there is no greater feeling in the world. They are often the women's and men's world and the parents love them more than themselves. Things change as you grow older and everything is put into perspective. Everyone is different and there are obviously women who even in their 30s and 40s don't want a family, don't want to raise children and have other goals. I'm technically one of those women, but I do see the happiness in the faces of my brothers and sisters in laws. One of my sister's in laws, a Cambridge Graduate who is a marketing manager, a true business women, an independent and powerful woman, someone who could take away my anxieties and give me the strength to move forward. Someone to be admired. I see how she is changing after having children, she is still the amazing woman that she was but she is also a mother and her children come first as they come to so many parents.

Instead of trying to see the situation in the widest way possible, to try and understand those who are different or experience life in drastically different ways than us, I see women who exclude other women and make them feel bad for being themselves. I see women who believe that they know better than other women how they should live, judging them for letting others control them. I see femininity, being viewed as something negative, not by men but by women and that makes me feel uncomfortable, because it is an important part of many women's experience of being a woman. Some women like wearing dresses, some like taking care of children and feel comfortable wearing makeup. That's a simply truth and the moment you try and paint that as negative you are excluding those women who just want to be free to be themselves, and making them feel ashamed for being who they are inside.

So before making arguments that paint femininity as something negative, before you view women as weak and unable to decide for themselves what they want out of their lives, please take what I just said into consideration and open up your eyes to the fact that there are others who experience the world differently and you might be hurting those women when you shout out that they are oppressed, because those women might not be, because women are in fact equal (Even if some might view us as not) and we have the power to shape our own destinies, to decide for ourselves what lives we want to live. Many women are being hurt, there are a huge amount of injustices and it is right to fight for equality and to help women who really are suffering, but the way to fight is not through exclusion of those who choose differently from us but through understanding, compassion and acceptance. Through a feeling of shared destiny and helping those women who are suffering understand that they are not alone, that they are a part of us and we them and we will be there for them if they reach out to us and ask for help.

(&&&)

Eveline

 

I don't really get it..men and women have the same rights legally.Socially women might have some small disadvantages and you have to be patient about that.I mean peoples' opinions are based off the generation they grew up.my generation is gonna be more open-minded about certain stuff and it goes on like that.it takes time for society to adapt and by making the majority of the people hating you,its obvious that you are doing something really wrong.if you actually to achieve anything start by saying ure equalist or something like that and not feminist because it is biased towards women's rights.
Personally I don't even think that women have less privileges socially than men.

 

I considered what I said about anti-feminists bringing up statistics over subjective experience, so please have a look into this short list that I have made:

These are all experiences that have happened to myself or a female friend/family member:

- Walking home, followed around by a guy in his car who wanted her phone number.
- Told to "stop being so silly" when she got upset that her dog was attacked (and could have easily been killed).
- Had creepy adult guys catcalling her when she was a minor (under 16 in Britain).
- Did nothing but wear a dress and walk down a road, had guys about 10 years older than her telling her that they wanted to "fuck" her and laughed when she got angry. Because who cares about a woman's feelings and pride if it means that you can't treat her like an object?

I think you get the picture. By the way, I know that worse things happen to women from other countries, but I can only speak from my own experience. I am not devaluing what happens to them at all, in fact, I encourage "anti-feminists" to go and research it. Also, much worse things happen to other women, even in Western countries. I'm lucky to have not dealt with any worse, then again, I do live in the countryside.

Anyway, um, please continue to tell me how your statistics show that there is no gender inequality at all.

---------- Post added 12th May 2016 at 12:11 PM ----------

Maybe because you're a man. Ask a woman.