Might help also to describe what you think feminism is, since it’s one of those terms that is overloaded.
I once had a physical therapist tell me she wasn’t a feminist because she thought women couldn’t be as physically capable as men when serving as soldiers, and seemed to believe feminism requires treating women exactly like men.
I told her I was a feminist because I believe in equal rights for men and women, an idea she did not seem so opposed to.
You must log in or # to comment.
I am a feminist.
Feminism means all genders should be treated equal, but that does not mean men should also get paid menstrual leaves at their job. Equal rights, yes. Everyone should be treated fairly.
Defining it as paid menstrual leave is kind of the problem. Hear me out.
Women should be able to take paid leaves from work to deal with menstrual problems, but it shouldn’t stop there. All people should be able to take leave from work when they need it.
So, if it is redefined as paid leave, then it equalizes the field.
I think the “when they need it” part is where the feminism becomes relevant - there is a history of women (and men) being denied leave when they need it for sexist / patriarchal reasons (e.g. men are generally not given paternity leave, women might not be allowed to take leave due to menstruation).
The scope of acceptable reasons to take leave is what is debated and where feminism has pushed for paid leave for reasons previously denied to both men and women.
I get you. But say, a company has a policy that we give employees 2 paid leaves per month, for example, a woman can take those 2 paid leaves for the same reasons as the men do, but they would also need a day more of paid leaves to deal with the menstrual pain/stress. If that extra day is not defined as “menstrual leaves” men would argue that why are women getting more leaves, and hence the feminism thing will be broken as both are not treated fairly.
Same in the case of pregnancy. Companies give 2 months of paid leaves for that.
Or maybe the right thing to do is, just say, if you’re pregnant, you get paid time off, if you’re having periods you get paid time off. Do not include gender in it.
Idk man.
I get what you’re saying, but if a woman is given more benefits than a man, businesses are disincentivized to hire women.
Unless the government subsidizes their wages or reduces tax burdens for companies that have more diverse hiring
That’s what we do in my country. If you hire only men you generally qualify for fewer government programs. In some cases you cant bid on the job if you don’t have sufficient representation for specific groups.
But I think the idea is that men should get the same lenience, i.e. just-feeling-wrecked-leave rather than menstrual-leave. The difference in having a baby should be that one needs medical leave too, in my mind.
And that’s why the amount of paid leave should not be limited by time but by reason. If you can’t work because you’re pregnant or sick or whatever, you get paid leave until you are better. And the employer or coworkers don’t even need to know why you can’t work, that’s for a doctor to decide. And anyone saying it’s not fair if they have to work more because they are not sick as often is obviously just selfish and not interested in equality
It’s a really shit word to use if it’s supposed to mean equality.
Are there any other words we can use to replace feminism that doesn’t show bias towards one side?
isn’t the nature of inequality that one side is privileged while another is marginalized?
Feminism is about gender equality, which means addressing the inequality that exists. You seem confused about what equality is about …
I’ll accept that feminism is about furthering the rights of women.
It’s not about equality, though, which is why we never hear feminists complaining about men in the draft or a lack of female representation in sanitation services.
It’s also a terrible word to use if it is about equality because it clearly favors one group over others. If you want to support equality, you should use a different word.
I kind of agree on this. Women cannot expect equal pay for less work.
But that’s not what they are expecting. They expect to not have to work if they are sick. And that should apply to anyone, shouldn’t it? Which leaves the question, who has to care for the sick? Historically that would be the family, but nowerdays with the focus on individualism, either everyone has to care (e.g. by some health care system) or we just accept that sick people are not cared for in our society and hope that we don’t get sick. I know I prefer the first solution
The problem is grey area in what sick means when it comes to periods. Is low mood sick? Is PMS sick? Is pain during periods sick? Is being irritable sick? This makes it seem like an excuse at time.
Men should also be then allowed to take leaves when they feel like shit or something. Point is equal pay for equal work. Women can’t expect to be CEOs and stuff when they don’t put in equal work. There are women who get to high posts inspite of all these problems and I respect that. I guess it is more of an individual to individual thing about who puts in efforts, who is truthful, etc.
I absolutely guarantee you one of those things is not like the others. Period pain can be truly debilitating, especially for a person with endometriosis. It is totally worth time off.
Also, I find your insinuation that women take time off for ‘low mood’ and ‘being irritable’ frequently—as opposed to men—rather sexist and offensive, not to mention not reflective of reality.
However, I do like how you inadvertently stumbled into the idea that we should all have more sick days and mental health should be included in the definition of ‘health’. Taking time off for a mental ‘breather’ should be normalized in our society. I also think higher-mental-stress jobs like 911 dispatcher should get more mental health off-time.
If it is a diagnosed disease, then time off is no brainer. However, then they should not expect any promotions over other people without the disease (assuming equal work/hour).
Also, I find your insinuation that women take time off for ‘low mood’ and ‘being irritable’ frequently—as opposed to men—rather sexist and offensive, not to mention not reflective of reality.
I don’t have data, it is based on my observations of people and opinions. I’d be happy to be proved wrong.
inadvertently stumbled into the idea
Because anyone other than “feminists” does not have a brain to come up with ideas intentionally. This statement is the perfect example why feminism is being promoted in an extremely stupid way. You attack the very people who are willing to engage in constructive discussions by calling them stupid. Then, you are surprised when they fight back and call them sexist pigs. No wonder men hate feminism as a movement.
And where in my previous post did I call you stupid?
You speak of mental health days in a derogatory way, as if you find the very idea that people should take care of their mental as well as physical health offensive, for reasons I don’t understand.
I’m saying that your mocking statement about taking days off for such things should in fact be something we do, and something we should find acceptable to do.
then they should not expect any promotions over other people without the disease (assuming equal work/hour).
Are you saying if they work the same hours, but take off more of their sick days because of a disease, they shouldn’t get a promotion?
No, I am assuming that they do the same amount of work per hour
I agree that there is a big grey area on what is too sick to work, but with my proposal at least we are a big step further and instead of the employer deciding for you (who wants you to work for them) or you deciding on your own (who might not want to come to work after a night partying), there is now an (hopefully) independant entity, the doctor who decides.
But I have to admit that of course the doctor can only listen to the patient and decide based on that, because there is just no way to measure pain/sickness objectively. So in the end we have to trust people to decide on their own if they are sick.
With your proposed solution of x sick days, I guess that many people that are actually too sick for work have to work just because they don’t have enough days, while some that don’t get sick might use their sick days anyway, because they have them. And even with my solution, realistically there will be a lot of people going to work when they should rest, while there will also be people that use the system to rest after celebrating. I don’t think a perfectly fair system is possible, but I prefer the system where people are not exploited and supressed.
Coming back to your argument on periods, like I said, there is no way to measure someones pain besides asking them, and ignoring their answer is not the solution, so yes women should be able to take leaves for period pain. And yes, men should be able to take leaves if they feel like crap, even if that might mean taking of a day off that they might have been able to work. In the end the grey area is not perfectly convertable to able to work/not able to work.
If someone is sick, and gets certified as such by a licenced medical doctor, they get leave. Why is this so complicated?
A clear certificate, then yes.
I don’t believe in an -ism. I believe in equal rights. I think the name feminism does more harm than good.
Why does the name do harm? If it was “anti-sexism” instead would it be more appealing, or are all “-ism” labels bad in your mind? (Might I ask why the -ism is problematic? Would you have the same view of anti-racism, for example?)
I’m not OP, but many people associate feminism with strengthening women specifically. If you look up the definition it actually does focus gender equality, no matter what gender you have. So from my perspective the term isn’t really intuitive.
Another thing I don’t like about the definition (at least the one on Wikipedia) is…
Feminism holds the position that modern societies are patriarchal—they prioritize the male point of view—and that women are treated unjustly in these societies.
While I sure get what they mean, I personally don’t like to classify one’s point of view as ‘male’. I agree that there are far more toxic men that seek more and more power. But i don’t dislike such people because they are men. I’d dislike their behavior just as much if they were women, non-binaries or any other gender. Classifying a character trait male IMHO is similar to calling a skirt or dress ‘women clothes’.
So yes, to me personally, anti-sexism / anti-discrimination or even better pro-equality are more appealing.
Do you think women face more inequality than men? What gender inequality is there to address, i.e. why does feminism as a movement of gender equality exist?
Yes, I think women face more inquality than men. And queer people face even more discrimination than women. But also cis-men that don’t fit well into the traditional gender roles, can face discrimation. I do not object the ideology behind femism. I just don’t like the term.
I think women do experience more gender based adversities, but I worry framing it like that creates an “us and them” situation between genders. We should fight inequality wherever it exists.
It also misses intersectionality. Not all men are advantaged over all women. A man born in poverty, violence, with a disability, or of a marginalised race, isn’t automatically better off than a rich white women born to a good supportive family.
Labels that start off as descriptive become prescriptive. People who associate strongly with a label are less likely to have nuance to their views or change their minds. It becomes us and them.
You can become a prisoner of your labels.
isn’t feminism prescriptive / normative to begin with? It’s not a neutral description of injustice, it’s a call to action, a movement … no?
I hear you on the strong connection to a label, the way us-them dynamics can be dangerous - but the extreme opposite doesn’t seem to work either, so I don’t see this as a full justification of rejecting labels. If you are invested in a movement towards equal rights, sometimes having a banner to organize under and communicate by is useful … it might be helpful to think of a time before the feminist movement existed, and the motivations that exist for the movement.
The fact that there are so many definitions of what feminism is, shows that the label is not super useful. If you say you’re a feminist, you then have to explain which version you’re taking about.
It could be anything from “people should be given equal opportunity” to the extreme “all sex between a man and a women is rape”
“isms” are useful, and the name feminism is perfectly fine.
No it’s not. It clearly favors one side, but then people are saying it’s about equality.
If whatever feminism is trying to describe is truly about equality, then we should use a term that isn’t biased.
This is the same as saying the “All Lives Matter” crowd were correct in fighting Black Lives Matter. Women are more oppressed than men, even if everyone is oppressed by the patriarchy.
Not really.
Black Lives Matter is a movement specifically to shed light on how cops abuse their power towards people of color and frequently go unpunished for it. Black Lives Matter is not about addressing how white people may suffer at the hands of police brutality and if you’re trying to argue that it is, then you’re either disingenuous or ignorant.
You do have a point though, where both feminism and Black Lives Matter focus on one group over people over others.
Feminism as a movement specifically sheds light on the systemic violence against women and gender-diverse individuals under patriarchy. That doesn’t mean men don’t also benefit, but it does shed light on the primary issue.
feminist as in “tear down unjust hierarchies”, and definitely not feminist as in “girlboss yay we need more ladies oppressors”
Exactly, also this “all men are bad and monsters” has to stop. This is not how you get the good men to help you stop and punish the bad men.
But yeah, fuck the patriarchy, women should have just as many rights and freedoms as men do, in theory and in practice.
reversing sexism isn’t a solution to any issue, it’s the irrational hierarchies that are bad, not the fact that it’s not your people on top.
also, I don’t think I’ve ever heard a feminist talking about “all men are monsters”, but I’ve definitely heard antifeminist men claim they do.
I agree, but sadly I have seen posts claiming that all men are monsters and lots of people agreeing online, and not just once or twice.
the funny thing is that now, me, a cis man, sitting in the loo, claiming to be pro feminist, is about to write “those aren’t real feminists”.
I’m laughing while writing this.
don’t take me seriously please.
You have not been on social media during that time period, maybe. It was everywhere which led some men to become antifeminist.
I’m a feminist, opposed to any unjust hierarchy really. One of the things that set me off at a young age was how the US never passed the equal rights amendment.
Also in my home country the women’s liberation movement was tied up with the communist movement which also is why I have a lot of the politics that I do
There are various schools of feminism, some of which have conflicting opinions. But the common feminist standpoints, like equal rights, seem to be just common sense for me, especially in this day and age. I’m not sure where the requirement for equal physical ability fits into the equation.
At least for me, going out and saying that you are feminist carries a sort of special connotation, and since I haven’t participated in any explicitly activist events related to feminism, I wouldn’t readily emblazon myself with the feminist label even though I stand by those ideas.
the physical therapist had a misconception of what feminism is, probably due to conservative misinformation that presents egalitarian movements like feminism as forcing men and women to be treated the same, and in this case the PT thought this meant soldiers were being forced to have women on their units that would slow them down or make them less effective because they weren’t allowed to vary the tasks based on strength because of “feminism”. I’m not even sure her story was based in reality, tbh - I’m not sure whether the military integrates women soldiers that way, but either way she has internalized some griping from her husband about this.
Either way, it’s interesting to me you wouldn’t identify as a feminist even if you agree with feminism - I wonder what connotations it has, and how those connotations will change if people who are feminists don’t own that … That was part of why I owned being a feminist in my interaction with the PT - she clearly had a misunderstanding of what feminism is, so I clarified why I see myself as a feminist. Otherwise she might not ever be challenged in her views, and “feminism” just becomes the absurd strawman she rejects.
If, say, I hear that “Bob is a feminist”, I reflexively think that Bob is somehow renowned or outspoken in contrast to the general public for supporting feminist causes, perhaps as an educator, figurehead, or activist. I’m not sure what other specific situations I would emphasize myself as feminist, but I’d do the same if put in your situation as a way of standing up.
oh interesting, the idea is that being a feminist is more than just about beliefs, it implies something more, like being an activist …
I tend to think identifying as a feminist is a lower bar, it just signifies you are in favor of equal rights among genders. I would have no problem identifying as a feminist just broadly - like on a bio, or in conversation.
I have to think about your meaning more, though - I feel like I have some sense of that, it’s maybe a bit like being “vegan” - it implies not just a belief, but maybe also actions you take. Perhaps being a feminist implies something like that in your world, that you are actively engaged in the feminist movement - whether organizing, theorizing, etc.
Either way, thanks for expanding my mind!
it just signifies you are in favor of equal rights among genders
It doesn’t “just signify that” though, as much as feminists act like it does. The term “feminist” does signify a person who, at least ostensibly, is in favor of equal rights among genders, but using that term also, necessarily, implies belief in the harmful dogma that is inseparable from the term itself (patriarchy theory, etc.). This creates a false dichotomy that makes people feel that in order to support equal rights they must also buy into feminist dogma, and that’s not at all the case.
Luckily, though, feminism doesn’t have a monopoly on gender equality, and it’s important to let people know that fact, both because of how incredibly misleading “feminism just means gender equality” is and because there are plenty of other more useful, more egalitarian frameworks through which to view the push for equality.
I think the reflex naturally makes sense, but from the people I personally know to be outspoken and definitionally feminist, it’s more like calling yourself a feminist says you explicitly side with the feminist cause. Sort of like saying you’re anti-racist rather than identifying as someone lacking racism, which is actually a farce when we’re all biased.
I consider myself egalitarian
I feel like the term Feminist gives too much of an impression that I tolerate or encourage misandry, which I certainly do not. That and if you look at feminist groups throughout history TERFs have been the norm, not the exception.
Egalitarian, because sexism cannot be tolerated no matter which direction it’s facing.
Yes.
Down with the liars who are talking of freedom and equality for all, while there is an oppressed sex, while there are oppressor classes, while there is private ownership of capital, of shares, while there are the well-fed with their surplus of bread who keep the hungry in bondage. Not freedom for all, not equality for all, but a fight against the oppressors and exploiters!
– Vladimir Lenin, Soviet Power and the Status of Women
Comrades, there is no true social revolution without the liberation of women. May my eyes never see and my feet never take me to a society where half the people are held in silence. I hear the roar of women’s silence. I sense the rumble of their storm and feel the fury of their revolt.
- Thomas Sankara
Thomas Sankara was a true hero that was killed because he dared to threaten the status quo of “haves and have-nots.”
Yes, my whole life. It’s how I was raised, but now that I’m an adult, it’s also what I choose for myself and how I’m raising my own children.
Feminism is the radical idea that a person’s worth, dignity, rights, and social status are not and ought not to be determined by their genitals.
As a CIS male I consider myself a feminist because I recognize that women continue to face systemic challenges that demand more than just abstract ideals of equality. To me, feminism goes beyond egalitarianism. It’s not just about treating everyone the same, it’s about recognizing the different challenges people face and working to change the systems that create and sustain those imbalances.
I was raised by my mom and 3 sisters, and that gave me a front-row seat to the everyday injustices women face. Everything from subtle slights to overt discrimination to being victim of abuse. It wasn’t theory for me, it was lived experience, just one degree removed. I’ve seen the strength and resilience of the women in my life, and I’ve also seen what they’ve had to push through simply because of their gender.
Now, as a father with a daughter, I feel an even deeper responsibility to be part of the shift. I don’t just want her to grow up in a world that pays lip service to “equality”. I want her to live in one where she’s safe, respected, and empowered. That means doing more than being “not sexist.” It means actively pushing back against the structures and behaviors (the patriarchy) that holds women back.
I have zero tolerance for toxic masculinity and so-called “alpha male” attitudes that promote dominance, entitlement, and emotional repression. That culture hurts everyone, but it especially harms women by normalizing control and aggression.
I want my daughter and every woman to see examples of men who are allies, not bystanders. Feminism is a promise: to show up, to speak out (or more often shut up), and to help dismantle barriers so that every person, regardless of gender, can thrive without restriction or fear.
I like the Rebecca West quote: “I myself have never been able to find out precisely what feminism is: I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat.”
I prefer the term egalitarian or something to that effect. I definitely fall under the definition of a feminist, but I think it’s sort of ironic that a term for equality has an inherent bias for women in the word itself, even if it is not the intended meaning.
I think the word itself has actually harmed the movement significantly. Turns out the words we use matter a lot. So again, I prefer a more neutral sounding term, like egalitarianism or equal rights.
I think its one of those things that doesnt translate so well outside of its time/place. Here in the UK we had people scoffing at “black lives matter” because “surely all lives matter are white people not as important…”. We’re not feeling systemic racism nearly to the same extent America is and the movement loses a lot of its power based just on the name. I think feminism has caught the same thing being out of its time.
There’s surely some issues still to work on with gender equality, but the main big ones have been pretty much solved as best we can. Women can vote, drive, work etc. On the surface the works already been done.
I think you might be on to something there. I’m in Denmark and Scandinavia have been forerunners when it comes to equality and LGBT+-rights and such, so perhaps the use of the “fem” in the term feels undue for my cultural background.
There’s surely some issues still to work on with gender equality, but the main big ones have been pretty much solved as best we can.
I think this very much depends on where you live. I’d say that even in Denmark, which is very well ahead of most of the rest of the world, there are still lots of gender equality issues. We’ve only “solved” them in the sense that the laws are fairly equal (not equal to the extent I would like it, but almost), but the culture is still somewhat unequal. Women still take much more parental leave than men do, for instance.
100% agree with this. A lot of people associate feminism with oppression of men.
Of course I’m a feminist. It’s one of those sublime categories like “alive” or “pregnant” that has only two possible states.
- Feminist
- Sexist pig.
This is the basic problem with how feminism is promoted. If you don’t agree with our views, you are a sexist pig.
This is not a good way to make reluctant people to accept your ideas. It pushes them even further into opposition.
If a person can’t accept the basic premise that woman are equal to men, they’re sexist by definition. This isn’t the fault of “how feminism is promoted”.
It is. Most people associate feminism with promoting women and not equality. Most people don’t look up the definition in a dictionary
I care a lot less about what word they use than what ideals they espouse. They can call themselves egalitarians or antisexists or whatever label as long as they oppose sexism, misogyny, heteronormativity, and “gender roles”.
Agreed. I think as a whole society has started giving more value to words than actions. It is backwards, especially when social media is prone to creating echo chambers for words, and actions go unnoticed.
“most people” are (1) a much smaller group that you think and (2) wrong.
If your behavior can at all be described as sexist, then you’re not a feminist. That includes both Feminism Appropriating Radical Transphobes like JK Rowling.and outright sex pests like Andrew Cuomo.
Well, I can only comment on my social group and that is the only group i am concerned about in this context. So, it is ‘most people’ for me.
If your behavior can at all be described as sexist, then you’re not a feminist.
I hate this polar thinking so much. Everything is not all or none, yes or no, black or white. People are unique and everything is a spectrum. Even Hitler had admirable qualities and if this makes you uneasy, you need to open up your mind.
Even Hitler had admirable qualities
But certainly the most relevant quality he had was his rabid, genocidal antisemitism, right?
You wouldn’t complain about him being labeled as a eugenicist just because he painted a little when he wasn’t slaughtering millions.
I don’t mix things. I admire Hitler for being a vegan and pursuing art. I absolutely hate what he did with concentration camps.
But certainly the most relevant quality he had was his rabid, genocidal antisemitism, right?
Relavant depends on the thing we talk about. If we are talking about history, he isn’t winning any Peace or Humanitarian awards.
Not everything is a spectrum. You are either actually pregnant or not-pregnsnt. You’re either free to go when the officet is talking to you or you are being detained. You either had consent for sex or you didn’t.
For example, if the example you provide to bolster your argument is “Hitler had admirable qualities”, then you’ve jumped all the way past Godwin’s law and there’s no use talking to you.
Flaw in your argument is that you are comparing states and one time actions with mindset and sum of many actions.
there’s no use talking to you.
Yet you did.
Can you please be a bit more concrete? What do you think feminism is and which views would push someone into opposition?
There are some who use the “feminism” banner to promoted sexism towards men. I’ve seen posts that talk about wishing for a world where no men exist etc and it gets praised under the guise of feminism.
Imo that isn’t feminism, that’s just misandry. If you swapped our the word “men” with “women” in those posts, they would rightly be called sexist.
I am definitely a feminist in that i believe in equality and believe that women have had a number of challenges presented to them that men typically dont experience.
I also, however, believe there are challenges that men experience that typically women dont.
Feminism is equal rights and opportunities for everyone. My added thing is equal responsibilities. This is the dictionary type of definition.
Most people (at least the vocal ones) are either completely sexist (both sides - feminazis and sexist men) or think it is only about promoting interests of women.
I can’t give you all the possible views off the top of my head but I’ll try.
- If you are not a feminist, you are sexist. - There is no nuance or leniency for human nature. This makes skeptics jump to opposition because they feel attacked for their behaviour. Any further push only makes them more apprehensive.
- Men have it so good - This is kind of a mixed bag for even me because it is situation and topic specific. Men have had better opportunities for some things like education or jobs, yes. But they have fared worse in some other things like emotions, expectations, dating, etc. Now, if someone who struggles with a lot of things is told “Men have it so much better”, they will not agree because any one person can only experience their own problems. On the other hand, there are men who feel women have it too easy with how they can earn money by selling porn, they can get out of situations by crying, how easy it is for women to get laid, etc. I don’t necessarily agree with everything but this is what I have seen people say. So, this makes “Men have it better” laughable for some people.
- Where are the equal responsibilities? - Feminism promotes equal rights but (conveniently) ignore the equal responsibilities part. A lot of women like to be damsels in distress and also want to enjoy the perks of freedom and equality. This is something I personally despise a lot.
If you are not a feminist, you don’t believe in the equality of the sexes, right?
I’m not sure, this feels a bit like when people complain about “anti-fascist” as a label because it makes them feel pressured to be anti-fascist or otherwise be seen as sympathetic to fascism … my question is why is anti-fascism (or in this case, feminism) so hard to accept?
I guess feminism works precisely by getting us to think about sexism and whether we think that is acceptable or not - I don’t think it’s good to be sexist, and I think it’s reasonable to feel ashamed about being sexist. Social shame and taboo seems appropriate in this case, no? Like the anti-fascist example, fascists should be ashamed and face taboo for their views.
Not that you’re wrong, some people will double-down in the face of opposition, this is precisely why so many fundamentalist churches promote street preaching, it doesn’t convert people (which is the reason given for the activity), but it is effective at solidifying the loyalty of the member, since on the street they experience significant opposition, which bolsters their in-group identity. It’s like a cult dynamic.
So yeah, it’s probably good for social shame to be introduced for sexism, fascism, racism, etc. - but it’s not a complete victory, the shame can induce stronger loyalties to those movements for those who still hold the views despite their taboo status.
People are unique and everyone has varying opinions on every topic, so how can they be simplified to a simple yes or no. There is a spectrum for everything. People who are at extremes find it easy to fit in yes or no categories but everyone else feels lost.
For example, there can be a guy in a rural area who supports his family’s women by letting them go to school/college, working, dating who they want but he is very adamant that they should not dress and wear makeup like “whores”. Would you call him a feminist? Why or why not?
it’s probably good for social shame to be introduced for sexism, fascism, racism, etc
Yikes, this is a hard no. People don’t change their views like this. Also, you are being a bully if you shame people for anything. Just because you think you have a moral high ground does not make it okay to impose it on others. You are no different than religious evangelicals if you do.
This 👆is the answer
JK Rowling and the other TERFs have kinda ruined that term just like the american right soiled the flag.
I prefer “egalitarian” at this point, less loaded, and gender inclusive. I’m one of those radicals where I want non-traditional families, no gender roles, and all the vanilla straight stuff to all exist side by side in harmony.
Also, women’s clothes needs real pockets. And men need cuter clothes like shortalls. That’s a world I want to be a part of :)
The one thing I’m not egalitarian about- straight men need to be taught to pee sitting down, or at least lift the seat, damn. I know it’s not all of you, but there are a couple of animals out there that need help. :p
The one thing I’m not egalitarian about- straight men need to be taught to pee sitting down, or at least lift the seat, damn. I know it’s not all of you, but there are a couple of animals out there that need help. :p
This isn’t really a gender issue, either, but I acknowledge men tend to be more of a problem here. But the solution is simple and egalitarian (or feminist, if you prefer): If you make a mess, clean it up. It also works in places besides the bathroom.
I want non-traditional families, no gender roles, and all the vanilla straight stuff to all exist side by side in harmony.
What do you mean by vanilla straight stuff?
The traditional ™️ heterosexual family with two kids and a bio dog. Which is totally fine too, in my book.
What flag?
I think they mean the U.S. flag.
Feminist as fuck!
Feminism is the fight for equality, with a particular focus on the needs of women and folk perceived as women. Men are included in feminism, but indirectly, in that improving equality for women necessarily requires addressing systems, norms and issues that negatively impact men as well.
Sure, it’s easy to say that you’re “egalitarian” or believe in “equality for all”, but those sound bites, whilst heading off the anti feminist folk, completely fail to address the fact that inequality is not equally spread between men and women. When everything else is equal, women still deal with more inequality than men, and feminism is exists because of that fact
When everything else is equal, women still deal with more inequality than men, and feminism is exists because of that fact
this is such a succinct and eloquent point about why “feminism” is focused on women at all … this point seems lost on so many men, who seem to think “equality” demands we ignore the way inequality and power is distributed, as if the only approach to the situation is a kind of gender-blindness, and anything else is hypocrisy
Can you explain how women deal with more inequality than men?
Until 1972, birth control pills were not accessible to unmarried women.
Until 1973, women in most states could not serve on juries in the U.S.
Until 1974, women were unable to obtain a credit card or open a bank account without their husband as co-signer (and unmarried women were entirely unable to have a bank account or credit card).
Until the 1970s, women were not permitted at most Ivy Leagues (e.g. Harvard did not allow women until 1977).
Until 1978, women could be fired for becoming pregnant.
Until 1980, sexual harassment was not considered a form of sex discrimination, and the first legal case where a court agreed a woman was sexually harassed in the workplace was in 1977.
Until 1993, husbands could legally rape their wives in the many states of the U.S.
Until 2010 health insurance companies were permitted to discriminate against women and charge them higher prices than men for the same coverage.
Until 2013, women were not permitted to serve in combat roles in the U.S. military.
One in three women have experienced physical or sexual violence from an intimate partner (compared to 1 in 14 for men).
Women still earn 82 cents to the dollar compared to men, and in 1982 that was 65 cents to the dollar (the situation has not improved since the 90s).
Women experience greater job gaps and unemployment than men.
Only 10% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women.
In 2022, only 33% of university presidents were women.
Women currently make up less than 30% of the U.S. House of Representatives, and 25% of the Senate.
For more: https://www.un.org/en/un75/women_girls_closing_gender_gap
There are a lot of good points in there, the historical part especially highlights good parts why feminism is necessary.
However, studies show that women simply don’t want to be CEOs at the same rate as men. Women personally want to be more in domestic/caretaking roles than men. Women want to take more maternal leave than men. Now of course you might try to explain these in terms of existing structures that push women to think like that, but how do you explain that women in “more equal”/more feminist societies actually more heavily lean into these differences?
Have you ever thought about the remaining gender pay gap being because women want to work less, thus having less experience, thus being paid less for less experience? There are studies that, when adjusting for these differences, find that the gender pay gap is actually 1% or less. It then stands to argue that the gender pay gap has not changed since the 90s because since then, for all variables adjusted, women already get paid the same as men. (Logically, if women were paid “too little”, in our hyper-capitalistic world, you would see that companies made of women would severely outperform those made of mixed/male workforce, since companies made out of women workers would have severely lower costs. The fact that this is not the case tends to point towards pay being roughly equal. Anecdotally, I personally know 2 women who were unhappy in a “feminism-pushed” leading role and switched to a more classically women-associated work, and becoming more happy as a result of that.)
I love feminism and it is overall a good thing, but the sole problem I have with it is that it wants to eliminate “too much” inequality. Some inequality is desired because men and women are different in some ways. The hormonal mixture is very different, with hormones strongly affecting our behavior. Thus, it is expected that behavior between men and women is different, thus differences should exist. I don’t think the work is done for feminism, but I also think it’s doing too much/the wrong thing in some places. Obviously, there’s also a massive difference between regions in the world, Finland needing feminism much less than idk, Afghanistan.
From my feminist perspective, I want similar pay for similar tasks and experience, so your point could be construed, I think, as reductionist of all feminisms. I don’t know any feminist in my circles that would argue that a man willing to do a dangerous job should be paid less to be equal to a woman doing a safer version of the job for example. The problem is that where I’m from, a woman and a man with the same diploma don’t have similar salaries for the same job.
For each of those examples women were disadvantaged and men were advantaged. So they both experienced inequality.
You really missed the point on this one, huh
Your original question was to ask how women deal with more inequality than men.
Most people use “inequality” to refer to the short end of the stick in the dynamic - when Ada talks about women experiencing more inequality, she means women are more disadvantaged.
So it seems like your question to me was to ask how women are disadvantaged compared to men, but your response shifts the meaning of “inequality” so that you were originally asking … what, exactly?
Yeah sorry, I meant inequality is non directional. It might seem like I’m being pedantic with language. But I was unsure if you meant that men’s experience was more homogenous than women, so women experience more inequality even within their gender. Which I don’t think it’s the case. There are more male billionaires and CEOs, but also more male homelessness and suicide.
I am a feminist because I believe men and women should have equal rights. I think a lot of people fell for the propaganda that feminism is about women over men or something. The thing a lot of men fail to realize is that “the patriarchy” hurts them too. A lot of the things you see men complain about like being told to “man up” or not being able to express their feelings without being mocked are 100% a side effect of patriarchy.
I would love to rephrase the word to “Equalist”.
Equal rights for all!The word you’re looking for already exists, it’s egalitarianism lol.
Well.The word problem is solved. Hooray.
Can the world now calm the hell down and just be peaceful with everyone playing nice? :(
Equal rights for all!
That’s what feminism is. That’s my whole point about people falling for the propaganda that it means something else.
“Man up” isn’t always about bottling your feeling like the US internet says. More often it’s “stop complaining and just do it”. And someone has to do “it”. And it often leads to growth.
The internet often distorts things.
As for the topic, I am a feminist. The first and second wave feminism, that is. The equality ones. Not the pink haired screaming “all men are evil and should pay” third wave. Everybody screaming “patriarchy” while sitting on their bed, not even looking further then that. Looking at everything black and white.
Actually, I’m kinder to women then men…
“Man up” isn’t always about bottling your feeling like the US internet says. More often it’s “stop complaining and just do it”. And someone has to do “it”. And it often leads to growth.
I’m sure telling people who are hesitant to open up about their feelings and want to express them more to “stop complaining and just do it” will definitely make them open up about their feelings. 🙄 Way to miss the point entirely.
Not the pink haired screaming “all men are evil and should pay”
I don’t think that caricature helps promote gender equality.
As for the topic, I am a feminist. The first and second wave feminism, that is. The equality ones. Not the pink haired screaming “all men are evil and should pay” third wave.
Actually, I’m kinder to women then men…
