Are You a Feminist

Like Tree28Likes

"75% Feminist

You are certainly a feminist - whether you know it or not.
You believe in gender equality, at least most of the time. You also believe there are a few exceptions."


I agree with my assessment. I believe that men and women are different and should respect each other, not overtake/belittle each other. I'm one of those feminists who would like a "traditionally" masculine partner, one who's the breadwinner, can fix things around the house and car (and I also need to learn those skills), while I'm more in charge of the domestic duties. That being said, our strengths should compliment each other. I also don't think women should aspire to be 100% like men, because what does that say about femininity and women in general? That we're somehow not good enough as we are so we have to be treated and seen just like men? The whole "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" mentality is useless and serves no benefit to women long-term.

If a woman chooses to live her life single, no kids and be a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, then go for it! If she chooses to be a stay-at-mom, good for her! I see a lot of today's feminists demeaning women who choose a more traditional lifestyle, which is one reason I'm reconsidering my involvement with the feminist movement.

A true feminist would never degrade another woman's CHOICE.
Originally Posted by CatitudeBoo
Agreed! :-) Well said
I didn't need the quiz to tell me, but yeah, I took it and I was 100% feminist.

Funny thing, I've always been independent and never needed a man to take care of me, and I never imagined being anything but a career woman, but after I had my son (he's 3), I became a stay at home mom. I'm an ER nurse (when I worked). It was hard for me to make the transition at first. I felt kind of lost not going to work every day. There are times I still miss it.
But staying home with my son is the best thing I ever did!
I may return to work when my son is in school full time. I may not. Either way, it's my choice.

3A, a mix of boticelli, corkicelli, and a few s-waves, baby fine, naturally porous, medium/high density

Pre-poo: coconut oil
Co-wash: TJ's Tea Tree Tingle, Sauve Naturals, VO5, As I Am coconut co-wash
Conditioner: TJ's Nourish, Tresseme Naturals, Sauve Naturals coconut, SM Coconut & Hibiscus
LI: KCKT
Styling: DevaCurl Light Defining Gel, HETT Mousse (HG's!)
EcoStyler Krystal (new HG!!!), BRHG
coconut oil or jojoba oil to SOTC
Color treated with demi-permanent color to cover first grays
It kind of makes me laugh there's a quiz for this. I don't get how you can be anything other than 100% feminist, or a plonker.

There's so much bad stigma associated with feminism and people don't seem to want to be labelled as 'feminist'. Some folks are like, 'I'm KIND OF a feminist' or 'I wouldn't really call myself a feminist, but I believe in equality'.

A feminist is, quite simply, somebody who believes in equal rights for women. All this bad stigma associated with the word is ridiculous, and it's only perpetuated by people being afraid to use the word out of fear people might look at them weirdly or something.

Take Shailene Woodley's recent interview on whether she was a feminist:
'No because I love men, and I think the idea of ‘raise women to power, take the men away from the power’ is never going to work out because you need balance. I think that if men went down and women rose to power, that wouldn’t work. We have to have a fine balance.'

-_-

LOL
CurlyDiva71 likes this.
Allie

3A with some 3B thrown in. Medium porosity. High density. Low-medium thickness.


Pre-poo: Organic Virgin Coconut Oil
Low-poo: Shea Moisture Coconut & Hibiscus Curl & Shine
Conditioner: Faith in Nature or
Shea Moisture Raw Restorative
D/C: Giovanni 2chic Avocado & Olive Oil Ultra Moist Deep Moisture Mask

Leave-in: My DNA
Styler: Ouidad Climate Control Heat & Humidity or
Umberto Giannini Scrunching Jelly

UK curly. CG since October 2013.
Aiming for WL curls (eventually)
^ well, she is right in some regards. the dominant group (WASP heterosexual able-bodied men) having ALL the power is the reason we have so many inequalities among non-dominant groups today. it shouldn't be 'all or nothing' because, again, if that worked so well, we wouldn't need to fight for equality.
curlypearl likes this.
CG since Dec. 2013
3b/c ~ fine ~ high porosity ~ low density
Cleansing: Loreal EverCurl Hydracharge Shampoo
RO: Suave Naturals Coconut, Suave Professionals Shea Butter & Almond Conditioner
Styler: Suave Professionals Captivating Curls Mousse, Rave 4x Unscented Hairspray
*less is more*
I agree it shouldn't be 'all or nothing', but feminism doesn't mean that anyway. Shailene basically said she wasn't a feminist because she thinks feminism is about women being in charge of everything and hating men. She stated there needed to be a balance, but that's what feminism IS; it's about having balance and equal rights.
curlypearl and Blueblood like this.
Allie

3A with some 3B thrown in. Medium porosity. High density. Low-medium thickness.


Pre-poo: Organic Virgin Coconut Oil
Low-poo: Shea Moisture Coconut & Hibiscus Curl & Shine
Conditioner: Faith in Nature or
Shea Moisture Raw Restorative
D/C: Giovanni 2chic Avocado & Olive Oil Ultra Moist Deep Moisture Mask

Leave-in: My DNA
Styler: Ouidad Climate Control Heat & Humidity or
Umberto Giannini Scrunching Jelly

UK curly. CG since October 2013.
Aiming for WL curls (eventually)
I am most certainly NOT a Feminist.

I think that the issues that Feminists in the Western World are fighting against are a series of false threat narratives. I do not think that women have different rights or different choices or that they are held back by society.

In fact, I think in many instances women get a far better deal than men do especially in respect to child support and child access and the like.

Yes, I think that women ought to have equal rights, but women do.
Yes, women should have the choice to become CEO's or Housewives, but they do.
I do not get the idea that there is a movement to give us these things.
You may say that Feminism is about equality but I have seen in the areas in society where men are disadvantaged, it is never recognised and Feminism does not seek to redress the balance (and I have seen the effect on male members of my family and male friends and I know how it affect them).
So it is not about equality.
You may say that women were oppressed throughout history, but I do not see that either. I really don't. I see men and women forced by society into really inflexible roles relating to cultural, sexual, gender specific and so on.
There was a time that every family in a village or town knew the heartache of losing a child. That childhood mortality was rife. People had to have more children for the fact that many would die before they reached adulthood. Not only that, but they had no means of supporting themselves once they got old and so the husband and wife would need as many kids as possible to allow the burden to be shared with the surviving children.
The husband and wife knew the situation (it was not some sexual slavery forced by the evil Patriarchy), but their relative position in their life dictated that there was not too many other options for them.

There was also not much in the way of decent childbirth practices and women died all too commonly from either the birth or from complications. Therefore, at any time a wife (from marriage to menopause) was risking her life from multiple pregnancies and/or was bouncing from pregnant to nursing.

Who was the person best to provide for the family? The woman with life threatening pregnancies and continually in a childbirthing cycle or the man who is not? It HAD to come down to the male to do this, on a practical level. If the man had to support himself then he ought to support his wife too, and every one of his increasing family and IF he HAD to take full responsibility for this, he had to have something to allow him to take care of his family and fulfill all obligations on him. Those things were rights. As hard as it may be to hear, she did not need those rights as she had none of these obligations to fulfill. It was not unfair or oppression that she did not.

Feminism did not change this. Society changed due to steady advancement.
Vaccinations, better childbirthing practices, introduction of the Pension in 1930's, contraception and the introduction of time saving housekeeping equipment, were a catalyst for the changes we experience today. Feminism played a part sure. It saw the society had changed enough and found the changes too slow in trickling down in society and speed them up BUT they were NOT the cause of the changes. were that the case, they could take the Feminist blueprint and transplant that in Somalia or Egypt or any third world or developing country.

The very things that changed for the Western World would need to change first and once they did change, then slowly and without Feminist intervention, these changes to society would occur. Made not as fast and maybe not with such screeching of Patriarchy, (and possibly without Fathers being denied access to their children because they are men) but it would change regardless.

I think Feminism portrays women as without agency and oppressed by men and victims in a society that favours men above women and where their best efforts are in the face of male bias" I think it is rubbish. Pure unadulterated rubbish.

I do not think this strengthens women and I do not think that women do get a raw deal. I think that Feminism likes women scared and feeling disempowered and reliant and in opposition to men and society and kept busy with false threat after false threat. I think it is disgusting.

Sorry that is a bit of a rant, but I think it needs to be said. Plenty of Feminists in the thread and even a few "No self-respecting woman would not call herself a Feminist". It is not the case at all. I am sick or propaganda and shaming and bullying from Feminism both on men and women that do not "tow the line"
I am most certainly NOT a Feminist.
Originally Posted by DorothyDalt
So you don't believe in equal rights for women?

You also think it's not OK for men not to be able to see and look after the children they fathered if they happen to get divorced?

While one popular theory and politicisation of that theory has has been taken over and distorted by a group of middle class White women in the majority of Western countries, the actual movement applies to all men and women worldwide who believe that women and girls should have equal rights to men and boys regardless of the country they live in. Not more rights and not less rights but equal rights. This obviously works in the reverse.

If you don't like what's happening where you live with feminist movement it doesn't mean you have to ignore for example girls not be educated in some developing countries by not supporting them.
BotticelliBrit likes this.
I am most certainly NOT a Feminist.
Originally Posted by DorothyDalt
So you don't believe in equal rights for women?

You also think it's not OK for men not to be able to see and look after the children they fathered if they happen to get divorced?

While one popular theory and politicisation of that theory has has been taken over and distorted by a group of middle class White women in the majority of Western countries, the actual movement applies to all men and women worldwide who believe that women and girls should have equal rights to men and boys regardless of the country they live in. Not more rights and not less rights but equal rights. This obviously works in the reverse.

If you don't like what's happening where you live with feminist movement it doesn't mean you have to ignore for example girls not be educated in some developing countries by not supporting them.
Originally Posted by Blueblood
Well, you asked a question, "So you don't believe in equal rights for women?" I will answer this with another "In which part of the very long rant did I at any point or in any way infer, imply, or suggest that I did not believe in equal rights for women?" I didn't did I? In fact, asking this off me is not a genuine question, given that I said "Yes, I think that women ought to have equal rights, but women do. ".

So being that I said entirely that I DID believe in equality, why is it that you asked me a question on whether I believed it?

You also asked me "You also think it's not OK for men not to be able to see and look after the children they fathered if they happen to get divorced? "

Do I really think that? You said "You also think..." So now I will appeal to your good sense of fairplay and ask you to point out the part of what I said that would indicate that. If not, I hope you will be decent enough to say that this too was not a genuine question and I had actually indicated no such value.

If you can do this and explain the first question you posed to me, I am happy to look at the rest of what you said because it really looks to me that you ignored everything I said and are simply trying to insult me by suggesting I have values and ethics I do not have. I may be wrong, but it seems that way.

I am not inclined to defend values I do not hold or positions I do not have. It would be like me saying "So you are basically saying that you hate babies" You would or at least should not feel a compulsion to defend that statement and ought to feel a little insulted that I make such a comment on your values unjustly. That is where I am at right now. I am happy to defend my words or the positions I have actually taken though.
@DorthyDalylt then you are a feminist.

There is more than one feminist ideology and movement. Your first rant encompasses one of them - men's liberation. There are a few others you covered.

Instead of getting angry at us here you should really comment on the stupid articles that these middle class mostly White Feminists who have their voices in the Western media put out.

If enough women and men keep tell them they are talking [expletive], their version of feminism is wrong as it ignores the rights of men, other disadvantaged groups and normal women they will eventually change their ideology.
@DorthyDalylt then you are a feminist.

There is more than one feminist ideology and movement. Your first rant encompasses one of them - men's liberation. There are a few others you covered.

Instead of getting angry at us here you should really comment on the stupid articles that these middle class mostly White Feminists who have their voices in the Western media put out.

If enough women and men keep tell them they are talking [expletive], their version of feminism is wrong as it ignores the rights of men, other disadvantaged groups and normal women they will eventually change their ideology.
Originally Posted by Blueblood
I am really sorry, Blueblood. I know you mean what you say in the nicest possible way, but it is indirectly insulting.

Here is what I mean. If you told, at length, that you believed in equality of opportunity for people of every race, colour and creed, and I asked whether you had anything against white people, you saying that you had nothing against white people does mean that if I say "Then you are a white supremacist" you ought to be insulted. What is more it would be insulting for me, in this scenario, to insist that you were the very thing you were denouncing.

It is a false narrative.

It is like every evil in the world is a result of the evil Patriarchy and every benefit the result of Feminism. Every Female strength or value is a Feminist value and every female weakness or shortcoming, the result of oppression.
Not enough CEO's, not enough women compared to men applying for positions and working their way up the ranks for reasons of choice. Women not on average earning as much as men - but men dying in the workforce at 95% of all death and injuries. So why is there this big inconsistency? Because women value safety, location and family friendly occupations that are not as dangerous, remote, dirty, physically demanding and as long hours as men (generally and on avaerage). Until women do, they will have to accept men on average will earn more if they take jobs that women do not want. Female politicians are scarce? Then as women are a higher voting percentage in the country, why are they not just getting behind a woman and voting them in. They have higher voter numbers, they can do it? Because it is really not a proper issue. Do not get me started with Ban Bossy.

If you are trying to tell me that men's liberation (whatever that is suppose to really mean) is on the Feminist agenda, what has Feminism done in the last 60 years to help men in the very areas of society that women hold sway? 60 years is a very long time and if they are about equality I expect that there would be a lot of areas that they worked on and did for men nd for men's benefit. But there is not, because it is not about equality and our nephews and nieces are being wretched from our brothers as a result of a broken system that Feminism enforced through things like the "Tender years doctrine". It was never about equality. Never really was.

I know the, "but other women in the world..."
Let me say clearly, those cultures are restrictive in the similar ways to how ours was. It was not "because there was no Feminism" and it was not as a result of "oppression". Society HAD to operate that way because of the lack of vaccines, childbirthing practices and procedures, lack of social safety nets and lack of contraceptives.

Feminism did NOTHING, to help in these thing. In fact the people who made changes were for the most part men. They help our society change to a time that men were not burdened with all obligations to their family and women were not burdened with imminent death from one of many children being born.

Change these things in society and it will change. With our society we did this and from changes started in the 1800's (with various vaccines found and mass produced) to 1960's? (with Contraceptive pills) our society changed enough for the very unburdening process and the transfer of rights to meet those shared obligations to start. But Feminism came in demanding and pushing for changes to happen faster and in the biggest conjob in history, has convinced generations that they were the cause of changes and that we all owe Feminism. Secondly that it is a male conspiracy via the Partiarchial Bogeyman that has oppressed us.

If it was all true. Let's pretend that it is. why then is it not as easy as just "transplanting what is a proven formula for a better society" into a society that is struggling? The answer is Feminism is impotent and useless unless the very changes needed to break social restrictions require from society to survive are no longer required. Once a third world country has no problem with social welfare and ample supply of vaccines and adequate living conditions with decent childbirthing facilities and so on, then it has reached a point where women are no longer needing to be cosseted and protected and the men are not needing to take on board all responsibility and accountability for everything.

This is all that is needed in society. The changes with things like this are gradual in a way that all evolution is but it will happen eventually. Forcing changes at this point through Feminism may get the changes happening sooner, but that does not men they were not going to happen anyhow or that the whole history was male drive Patriarchal oppression.

I used to believe all of this. Down to my very bones because I did not question the propaganda. I thought all my male ancestors misogynists and my female ancestors oppressed. I thought that it was a proven fact and decent to believe in. I do not any more and I am quite revolted I was conned into believing it all in the first place.

Last edited by DorothyDalt; 08-16-2014 at 11:38 PM.
Feminist ideologies have been around since the 19th Century if not before.

I'm not in the US so some of the things I know feminists in my country have campaigned for wouldn't have been put in law if they hadn't brought them to the attention of wider society. A lot of the women involved were religious i.e. Quakers, married and supported by their husbands.

In regards to dirty work - in some areas women and children were actually banned for being involved in them as far back as the Victorian era. For example in 1842 females and young boys were banned for working underground in mines in the UK. The law wasn't repealed until the late 1980's when it was pointed out by the European Commission that certain laws aren't compatible with equality in the workplace. Since attitudes change at a slower level than the law it's not surprising there aren't many women working in the mining industry.
BotticelliBrit likes this.
Feminist ideologies have been around since the 19th Century if not before.

I'm not in the US so some of the things I know feminists in my country have campaigned for wouldn't have been put in law if they hadn't brought them to the attention of wider society. A lot of the women involved were religious i.e. Quakers, married and supported by their husbands.

In regards to dirty work - in some areas women and children were actually banned for being involved in them as far back as the Victorian era. For example in 1842 females and young boys were banned for working underground in mines in the UK. The law wasn't repealed until the late 1980's when it was pointed out by the European Commission that certain laws aren't compatible with equality in the workplace. Since attitudes change at a slower level than the law it's not surprising there aren't many women working in the mining industry.
Originally Posted by Blueblood
Yes, this is not completely non-consistent to what I have been saying.
In the 1800's, Feminism would have not had been able take a hold in the same way as it could not take a hold in a Third World country. Why? The society needs to evolve to the level women do not need to stay at home and men do not need to take all the burden of all obligations for the family. In 1800's this had not and could not happen.

Men have always tried to protect women and children. They imposed restrictions on putting women and children's lives at risk (interestingly, they were a lot more disposable wit their own lives). But you are not using this as a coverall reason why women (in general) do not take on any jobs in any sector that are risky, more physical, dirtier, more remote or whatever and nor are you saying (in this time and age and with the advent of "equality") that men ought to be paid the same as women who choose jobs which are not all of these things? Right? Just so I know your perspective.

I think that if women are given all rights and opportunity and now it is being blamed on attitudes (30 years down the track) that it may be time to blame it on choice. If women do not choose certain professions or to acquire money in certain ways, then that is their choice. If they choose then they are accountable. As am I personally.

It cannot be that when a woman chooses something that she gets benefit for all aspects of her choice but yet avoids all responsibility or accountability for her choices if they are not beneficial.

It has been polarised for too long that if it benefits, it is because of Feminism and it there is a disadvantage it is because of Patriarchy.

I would argue that laws that were put in place would not if not for Feminism. How do you know? No, honestly. because the laws (whichever they were) were suggested by Feminists? Because they were not embraced at the time they were suggested? None of this even remotely suggests that they would not have been introduced at some point. So I have no idea why you would say this.
Pay for jobs is based on the number of potential applicants available to do the job as well as the skills required for the job. In addition the state the industry is in.

Miners were actually paid really badly. The job was classed as unskilled and there were lots of men available to do the work. When equal pay etc laws came in the underground mining industry was actually being closed down in the UK so there weren't jobs for men already in the industry let alone new entrants regardless of gender. If the industry hadn't collapsed then maybe some woman may have had to fight to work underground as some of the jobs didn't require digging out coal. Other countries don't have laws restricting women from working in mines but they have horrendous
unsafe practises. This means both men and women die as lots of the mining is unregulated.

I actually work in a male dominated industry and on several of the projects I've worked on one or more of the women in the team including myself have been paid more than the men we work alongside due to us being more highly skilled.

There are quite a few industries that are male dominated in the engineering and technology fields where you never have to get your hands dirty. Even if you have to visit clients and go on sites your hands don't actually get dirty. Due to the fields requiring use of logic, Maths and Physics they are perceived as "hard" areas by lots of people. They also tend to be better paid than some female dominated ones.

Feminists - in this case they were working class women in a car factory fought - for the right of myself and other women to be paid at a rate that compensated us for our skills and not just to paid less because of our gender.

The person who listened to their initial demands was a female politician who had to point out to male politicians, who dominated the government, why their demands made sense.

Neither they or the politician who fought for their demands saw themselves as feminists until after the events. They were just fighting against a practise they fought was unfair.

If I work alongside a man with the same/similar skill level doing work of equal value neither one of us should be paid less than the other.

I've worked in and done work for call centre workers. I've also used and done work for delivery drivers. Call centre workers are predominantly female and delivery drivers are predominantly male. (Though not in all companies.) The men get the same pay as the women who work doing the same job. Companies decide what role requires more skill and are harder to recruit and pay accordingly. You could argue a delivery driver out on the road faces more risk than a call centre worker in an office/ their home but companies don't see it like that. The pay for both types of work is poor and in fact delivery drivers are paid the worse as they often have to provide their own transport.

Why don't other women go into more highly skilled male dominated industries?

The most obvious one is Economics. I was told not to go down certain paths by one of my older brothers' as he knew the pay in different fields. Other women I knew who have engineering qualifications realised this once they started work and saw the issues of their industry economics meaning they would face issues of redundancy and not being able to find work easily so they switched fields. These women were quite happy to work in non-office based locations. Some now work in a field, accountancy, that was male dominated but now has an equal number of men and women working in the field. In fact two women I know well use to spend a lot of their time travelling in this field and one had to juggle childcare.

Like with some other people I know the person to call when their child gets sick is their dad not their mum.

The second one is knowing what jobs available. If the people around you only do certain jobs and you only see others on TV, that limits the jobs you know about. When I initially got into my area people didn't understand what it was and how it impacted their lives. Everyone who uses a computer and mobile phone knows now. I wouldn't have know to look into this area if my brother hadn't pointed it out to me.
BotticelliBrit likes this.
Terribly sorry, are you saying that there are a lot of factors that influence a job's salary? Of course there are. I will not argue that. I will reiterate though if men are getting paid a higher average salary doing in general doing jobs that women in general will not do then the women who will not do the same undesirable jobs cannot complain about not being paid the same amount.

Now you mentioned that in one job there was a situation that women were getting paid less for the same job? Then, you are right, it was unfair and it needed to change. By the sounds of it, once it was pointed out it was changed.

As I understand it there are now discrimination laws in place if companies do not pay men and women the same amount.

But none of this disclaims what I have said. In fact, it supports it as far as I can see. I mentioned that the changes that needed to take place in order for men to stop having all the obligations and for women to be stuck at home were changing and that Feminism was not responsible for these changes as they like to proclaim. The only thing they did was speed up the changeover (sharing of obligations and distributing rights). A process that was slow and sped up by their intervention, but that was happening regardless.

But then I said this already. So even in the event that this was a cut and dried example of rights not being equal, and the completion of the changeover from the men at work women at home necessity, to men and women in the workforce, so what does this show? The very lag I spoke of that Feminists simply sped up? I would question what real point this makes. What point it made back then or what point it makes now that there are equal rights in respect to pay?

You probably have made a point I have missed, but I am not sure what that point is.
The point you are missing is feminism is more than a group of (mainly) women in academic settings telling other women how to live their lives and having media influence.

People who believe in gender equality and do practical things to make it happen like the women in the car factory, the guys who are the first point of contact for their sick children etc are feminists. Unlike academics they don't tend to make a song and dance about it.

BTW the women weren't doing the same work as the men they were doing work of equal value. This is actually harder to prove than doing the same work. Nowadays car manufacturing does not segregate jobs by gender.
The point you are missing is feminism is more than a group of (mainly) women in academic settings telling other women how to live their lives and having media influence.

People who believe in gender equality and do practical things to make it happen like the women in the car factory, the guys who are the first point of contact for their sick children etc are feminists. Unlike academics they don't tend to make a song and dance about it.

BTW the women weren't doing the same work as the men they were doing work of equal value. This is actually harder to prove than doing the same work. Nowadays car manufacturing does not segregate jobs by gender.
Originally Posted by Blueblood
No, I am sorry. That definition is not a workable one at all. All that is, is calling anything good and empowering to women Feminism and all people that are fair and nice to women Feminists and everything that is bad to women Patriarchy and every shortcoming of women either "just the radical fringe of Feminism" or "the Patriarchy". It is too polarised.

You know the early Feminists, the Suffragettes were involved in the shaming techniques of the White Feather campaign against young men and boys? Did you know they were not really concerned with women outside of their race, class or society?

This is a problem, Propaganda is pretty good. It makes it hard for the average person to consider that Feminism is not actually this saviour bestowed to us its grateful subjects by hard fighting and oppressed women through the ages, and so when we question it, we are seen as traitorous or ungrateful or conspiracy theorists.

No, I am sorry. That definition is not a workable one at all. All that is, is calling anything good and empowering to women Feminism and all people that are fair and nice to women Feminists and everything that is bad to women Patriarchy and every shortcoming of women either "just the radical fringe of Feminism" or "the Patriarchy". It is too polarised.
Originally Posted by DorothyDalt
It's only polarised if you don't understand their are many different ideologies and movements under the feminist label.

You know the early Feminists, the Suffragettes were involved in the shaming techniques of the White Feather campaign against young men and boys? Did you know they were not really concerned with women outside of their race, class or society?
Originally Posted by DorothyDalt
There are lots of feminists who have ideas other people don't agree with.

For example Marie Stopes who advocated birth control for women was a passionate believer of eugenics. Most people abhor the whole idea of eugenicsyet have no issue with women (and men) having control of their sexual health.
This is a problem, Propaganda is pretty good. It makes it hard for the average person to consider that Feminism is not actually this saviour bestowed to us its grateful subjects by hard fighting and oppressed women through the ages, and so when we question it, we are seen as traitorous or ungrateful or conspiracy theorists.
Originally Posted by DorothyDalt
The problem is people don't understand that a social or political ideology/movement with a label on it encompasses more than just a set of very narrow view points.

For example what is politically conservative in one country is different in another country i.e. Republicans in the US, Conservative Party of Canada, Moderaterna party in Sweden. Yet all their view points fall under the label "Conservative".

People also ignore the fact that people have multiple views that fall into different social and political ideologies. They just like giving a person one label then seem surprised that their other views fall under other labels, and so may be similar to theirs on other matters.

In my own country there are people on the left and right of the political spectrum in different political parties who call themselves feminists. They see achieving equality in society in different ways, and their views differ even if they are in the same political party as someone else who calls themselves a feminist.
BotticelliBrit likes this.
It is not what you have said is in any way inflammatory or anything, but there is a problem.

You are making Feminism everything and nothing at the same time. It has the envious position of having all the good bits associated with it and disavowing itself from anything done in its name that is not so good.

The same goes with Feminists themselves. Anything done in the name of Feminism is praised or excused. If Feminists do something undesirable, we are all reminded that "some Feminists take it a bit far" and are part of a radicalised group. The rest of Feminism is OK though Then something mainstream like "Ban Bossy" comes up and that is excused away too.

There does not seem much accountability. If I told you of the problems in the Family Courts as a result of Feminism or I told you the issues now with violence against men and how that has been doctored to weight the system against men. To place men as always the perpetrator, always the incompetent or dangerous parent and the gender not to trust or believe, some many say that it doesn't exist, some will say it is fair because of Patriarchy (insert illogical explanation) and then there would be people a little more educated and honest (like yourself) who would possibly say "Yes this is indeed bad but MY version of Feminism would seek not to discriminate in such a way.

All really fine and I understand that every Feminist has slightly different views, preferences, bias, culture, experiences and whatever, BUT in a sense it is a cop out isn't it. Feminism has never been accountable and you can never really say what is Feminism. As soon as you define it, someone else says, but that is not my Feminism. I see plenty of things done in the name of Feminism or social policies and pressures that are seen as beneficial to Feminism or on Feminist ideals, but it is never called into account.

Again, I find myself often painted as either not understanding Feminism or being traitorous for not embracing Feminism.

Trending Topics


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:22 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2011 NaturallyCurly.com