|
tbh I feel like ToxicSlurpee your problem comes from realising that its the job of advocates to advocate for their side in order to influence a conversation, not provide a perfect compromise fully formed. Let the feminists you know raise awareness about workplace equality for women and let it inform your worldview. If you are concerned about instances where our society negatively impacts men (custody battles, incarceration, mental health are all valid) then by all means advocate for them. You'll be surprised how much common ground you might find. Picking an issue that you are an advocate for doesn't poison the conversation, it gives it direction. Tone, aggression and duplicity are the only way to poison the conversation and none of them are inherent to feminism - although you can find examples of individual people arguing in bad faith anywhere.
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 17:24 |
|
|
Cognac McCarthy posted:Modern feminism is at its roots informed by leftist ideas of class struggle, and while it seems to have drifted away from labor issues in favor of cultural issues over the past few decades, there's virtually no way a serious feminist would object to paid paternity leave. Even a straw Feminazi should, in theory, be in favor of mandatory paid paternity leave. Imagine the hypothetical hiring manager trying to figure out who to hire. If he's considering a female candidate who is recently married, he's going to be wondering if a baby is on the way which would lead to maternity leave. If you have mandatory paternity leave, male candidates carry the same risk which means that the female candidates will have one fewer reasons to be discriminated against.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 15:17
|
|
|
Indeed, I'm searching pretty hard for any feminist opposition to paid paternity leave on the internet and nothing is coming up. The only thing I can find that's even remotely relevant is that in the 1960s and 1970s some feminists were opposed to mandatory maternity leave because they thought it would make companies less likely to hire women overall. In fact the only articles I see about paid paternity leave and why it's important are coming from feminist websites and writers. I see AVFM opposing all paid leave, of course.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 15:55
|
|
|
So let me just ask: If we have this idea of idealized feminism that advocates not only for women's inclusion in all fields of work and excludes things like radical feminism (SCUM Manifesto) and female superiority advocates, what is stopping someone from defining Men's Rights as advocates for paid parental (not paternal) leave, equal custody rights, and the lessening of the expectation that men are breadwinners and can be primary caretakers too? Or at this point has the idea of Men's Rights been so poisoned by radical meninists ( ) that it's like if the Civil Rights Movement was 90% Black Panthers and Farrakhan shouting 'Death to Whitey'?I do think some things defined as men's rights - because men can do the traditional roles of women and shouldn't get shamed for it - are important. It's just that I can't bring it up much like when a white person asks 'How can I help the cause of racial equality?' I'd be pretty annoyed if they showed up to a protest with an #AllLivesMatter sign so I'd tell them to sit down and listen and try not to interject your opinion in the conversation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:So let me just ask: If we have this idea of idealized feminism that advocates not only for women's inclusion in all fields of work and excludes things like radical feminism (SCUM Manifesto) and female superiority advocates, what is stopping someone from defining Men's Rights as advocates for paid parental (not paternal) leave, equal custody rights, and the lessening of the expectation that men are breadwinners and can be primary caretakers too? Or at this point has the idea of Men's Rights been so poisoned by radical meninists (
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 16:50
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:So let me just ask: If we have this idea of idealized feminism that advocates not only for women's inclusion in all fields of work and excludes things like radical feminism (SCUM Manifesto) and female superiority advocates, what is stopping someone from defining Men's Rights as advocates for paid parental (not paternal) leave, equal custody rights, and the lessening of the expectation that men are breadwinners and can be primary caretakers too? Or at this point has the idea of Men's Rights been so poisoned by radical meninists ( its different in that the Civil Rights movement would still own in this case
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 16:54
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:So let me just ask: If we have this idea of idealized feminism that advocates not only for women's inclusion in all fields of work and excludes things like radical feminism (SCUM Manifesto) and female superiority advocates, what is stopping someone from defining Men's Rights as advocates for paid parental (not paternal) leave, equal custody rights, and the lessening of the expectation that men are breadwinners and can be primary caretakers too? Or at this point has the idea of Men's Rights been so poisoned by radical meninists ( Yes, if we're going to hold ourselves to a very high standard for accuracy, we'll have a hard time saying much of anything about what feminism is. I think everyone agrees that we're talking about "mainstream" feminism. This doesn't mean moderate feminism, necessarily, as plenty of radical feminist ideas are pretty commonly held at this point. We're also specifically refuting things that, to my knowledge, literally no feminists of any sort have argued, like the idea that paid paternity leave shouldn't exist. (If you can find feminist complaints about this I would be fascinated to read them, honestly.) But talking about what mainstream feminism is and isn't is just fine when addressing concerns of someone who has apparently had very little exposure to it and who thinks "Feminism Has A Misandry Problem". With MRAs their own horrendous views expose themselves just fine and are pretty widely-accepted, because reasonable men who have some concerns about gender and who don't hate women typically just identify as feminists. quote:I do think some things defined as men's rights - because men can do the traditional roles of women and shouldn't get shamed for it - are important. It's just that I can't bring it up much like when a white person asks 'How can I help the cause of racial equality?' I'd be pretty annoyed if they showed up to a protest with an #AllLivesMatter sign so I'd tell them to sit down and listen and try not to interject your opinion in the conversation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 17:54
|
|
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:You call yourself a feminist, because those are things all sane feminists care about. If we're continuing the civil rights analogy, that's why groups like the White Panther Party existed; anti-racist, far-left, but accepting that they themselves didn't have the lived experience to be an integral part of the BPP movement (and because Newton said they should). I'm not sure I fully agree with that, but it does dilute the movement a lot when it becomes another checkbox label that anyone can apply to themselves. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 18:12
|
|
|
The existence of feminists who don't think men can or should call themselves feminists isn't super important though, since they generally still have no problem with men being allies or profeminist. I'm just saying it's not necessarily the marker of "radical manhater" it would probably seem to a nonfeminist. It's also not really the same thing as thinking "this is what a feminist looks like" shirts are dumb and smug. Probably there are plenty of women who hate those shirts but bout the notion of men identifying as feminists.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
the debate around calling men "feminists" or "feminist allies" is really just splitting hairs at some point and any men who understand that feminism is meant to be a movement that is generally interested in advocating the rights of women to be equal with men (as we are now deficient in our equal rights due to patriarchy) shouldn't really have a problem with not getting the full "feminist" title. It can be hard to convince straight, white men that their opinions are not always necessary or may not always take centre stage, but it's a truth that many men have come to accept. And yes, I would say at this point, after multiple death threats of prominent feminists, MRA's/GamerGaters/RedPillers/Meninists (don't even pretend there isn't any overlap between those groups because that is literally laughable) have poisoned the well for an extra-feminist serious discussion on men's issues. Which makes them all the more destructive. There are serious issues and those groups have effectively alienated men who would support their cause and drowned out the attention that many "men's rights" issues badly deserve. They really don't care about male rape survivors, men who choose typically female oriented careers or the systemic economic depression of non-white men. It's really about threatening, hating and insulting women. That has been shown so often that's it's basically background noise to the entire movement. Feminism has stepped up to take on those issues, but since feminism is typically focused on the rights of women, those issues can and do get lost (sometimes). The destructive idea of "masculinity" in our society is very bad for many men and we have left it unexamined. Meninists have helped that process time and time again. I would also add that many reactionary Men's Rights campaigns have actually catapulted feminists issues into popular support. If MRA's hadn't gone on a years-long harassment campaign of Anita Sarkeesian, she would have an obscure YouTube series, like FemFreq was before this whole jackfuckery started. Instead, the attention MRAs have drawn to her have made certain her Kickstarter campaign raised its goal many times over, the videos are widely viewed, she's been person of the year or received awards from many gaming industry organizations and been on Colbert to talk about it. So really anyway you slice it Men's Rights is a cancer on society and morally, philosophically, legally and practically indefensible.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Cis white men adopting feminist as a label seems like the best way to counter the "radical man haters" nonsense, and any argument as to why it's bad is going to be completely lost on anyone whose mind needs changing so you're basically creating internally divisive privilege Olympics for no practical gain to the movement. The White Panther comparison isn't really adequate unless you're advocating that we need different terms for white feminists and feminists of color since their experiences are also very different.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 21:26
|
|
|
 This was posted on Facebook by the woman who used to own my home before it got foreclosed. She is literally homeless and posting anti-welfare memes. I just don't understand this mindset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:The White Panther comparison isn't really adequate unless you're advocating that we need different terms for white feminists and feminists of color since their experiences are also very different. e: If several womanist theorists asked white women not to refer to themselves as womanists, I don't think that would be unreasonable either.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womanism This is, in fact, a thing E: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:
Because people already hate welfare. Those who would destroy the safety net need people to start hating Social Security, so they come up with cleverly misleading statistics to make it seem ineffective or troubled and justify cutting it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Rick_Hunter posted:So let me just ask: If we have this idea of idealized feminism that advocates not only for women's inclusion in all fields of work and excludes things like radical feminism (SCUM Manifesto) and female superiority advocates, what is stopping someone from defining Men's Rights as advocates for paid parental (not paternal) leave, equal custody rights, and the lessening of the expectation that men are breadwinners and can be primary caretakers too? Or at this point has the idea of Men's Rights been so poisoned by radical meninists ( because there is no body of Men's Rights literature. the only articulation of MRA comes from pseudononymous internet blogs actual Men's Rights stuff is easily handled by Feminism, because Feminism is all about deconstructing patriarchy in society which harms men as well as women. men being pressured into dangerous jobs, men being seen as inferior parents, men being seen as breadwinners who are not interested in raising children - all of these things are rooted in the patriarchy. it's men doing these things to men. this is why MRA is a complete joke - the core of MRA is a distaste of women and a desire to return to traditional gender roles, but better for men. there is plenty of space in Feminism to care about all the things MRAs pretend to care about. but MRA is reactionary, not progressive - it is inteded to yell at and blame women for pointing out the patriarchy, it doesn't care at all about trying to fix it e: an easy litmus to tell if someone is just cloakng themselves in pseudoacademic language to gain legitimacy is if they claim women actually have more rights than men. 100% guaranteed at the root of all of their statements is a core of "i hate women" boner confessor fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Mar 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 22:13
|
|
|
mr. mephistopheles posted:Cis white men adopting feminist as a label seems like the best way to counter the "radical man haters" nonsense, and any argument as to why it's bad is going to be completely lost on anyone whose mind needs changing so you're basically creating internally divisive privilege Olympics for no practical gain to the movement. Maybe, but if cis white men can't be okay with the fact that "this movement is not primarily about you (and it is okay if one thing in the world is not primarily about you)" from the jump, they're not the kind that would be convinced anyway. Really, feminism popular or academic is just many ways of expressing that sentiment. peter banana fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Mar 8, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
peter banana posted:Maybe, but if cis white men can't be okay with the fact that "this movement is not primarily about you (and it is okay if one thing in the world is not primarily about you)" from the jump, they're not the kind that would be convinced anyway. Really, feminism popular or academic is just many ways of expressing that sentiment. It seems to me you're going to have trouble convincing anyone to get on board if you tell them out of the one side of your mouth, "MRA concerns are solved by the feminist movement" but "sorry, you can't actually be a feminist" out of the other side of your mouth. It stands to reason that the effects of the patriarchy impacting men negatively, even if it's not to the same degree, also gives men ample cause to call themselves feminists. I feel like "feminist ally" isn't really necessary since "feminist" as a label by itself does a pretty good job signaling who the movement is primarily about. In fact, it's done such a good job of signaling that very thing that some people are hostile to it based on their mistaken impression from that label.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
a bloo bloo bloo I'm not going to join your movement which I admit helps me because you won't lay out a red carpet and lick my boots and thank me oh so much for agreeing to join and then agree to talk about the issues that affect me most because that's the only way you'd possibly get someone to care If you want to be a feminist support feminists. Egos need not apply.
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:this is why MRA is a complete joke - the core of MRA is a distaste of women and a desire to return to traditional gender roles, but better for men. there is plenty of space in Feminism to care about all the things MRAs pretend to care about. but MRA is reactionary, not progressive - it is inteded to yell at and blame women for pointing out the patriarchy, it doesn't care at all about trying to fix it Another easy litmus test is "is this person actually trying to get his concerns about men's rights addressed?" Take Steven Crowder's completely valid complaint that men work dangerous jobs that lead to health problems or an early death. Is he calling for better safety regulations, or worker's comp, or health care, or anything to actually reduce the number of men who are hurt or killed on the job? Nope. He's just complaining that women aren't dying enough. There are very, very few MRA positions in which the MRA proponents are actually trying to make life better for men. They're either complaining that women aren't solving this problem for them, or demanding that life be made worse for women so it's "fair".
|
|
#
?
Mar 8, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Take Steven Crowder's completely valid complaint that men work dangerous jobs that lead to health problems or an early death. Is he calling for better safety regulations, or worker's comp, or health care, or anything to actually reduce the number of men who are hurt or killed on the job? Nope. He's just complaining that women aren't dying enough. This pattern shows up a lot and it's important to recognize. If someone is complaining that prostate cancer is more deadly than breast cancer, find out what they're doing about prostate cancer. If he's really into improving education and making sure men get their physicals etc. for a long time and donates money to Prostate cancer causes, he might have real concerns. If not, he's probably just mad that other people are working on a cause that doesn't directly help him. Those other people need to stop what they're doing and start helping men.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:a bloo bloo bloo I'm not going to join your movement which I admit helps me because you won't lay out a red carpet and lick my boots and thank me oh so much for agreeing to join and then agree to talk about the issues that affect me most because that's the only way you'd possibly get someone to care if by "lick my boots" you mean allow for the fact that I am also a human being, then yes. Is it really that mystifying to you that people want to fit in?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:if by "lick my boots" you mean allow for the fact that I am also a human being, then yes. *marches proudly into holocaust memorial* what about the cis white male atheists
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:if by "lick my boots" you mean allow for the fact that I am also a human being, then yes. Congratulations! Feminists already think you're a human being. So does nearly the entirety of the rest of the world. No effort needed to be expended on that. Now, if you understand that part of the problem with men labeling themselves feminists (and oh GOD the shirts) is that women are sick and loving tired of hearing men tell women the best way to go about fighting for their equality, congrats, you might actually be human, and you can come sit down with the rest of the male allies of the movement and help when needed. Once you are asking for a movement to expend effort to acknowledge you personally as an ally or to make concessions to you as such, that's when you dip below the status of "also a human being" and into "Men's Wave Feminist". Seriously, Men's Wave Feminists are some of the loving worst. One I knew personally ranted at length about how it was women's clinging to the monogamous wedded relationship that was causing so much infidelity among men, which he was mostly using to justify to himself (we didn't know at the time) the fact that he was loving around on his wife. All of a sudden, polygamy and polyamory were #1 Feminist issues...because they would benefit him. That's a Men's Wave Feminist in a nutshell - the kind of guy who only cares about how the feminist movement can benefit him. These are the guys who only want "equality" for women in terms of getting more fathers custody of children, without exploring or challenging the root cause of why women are more likely to get custody even in cases where it is to the detriment of the child. They don't care about fighting patriarchal societal norms - they just want fewer child support payouts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 01:41
|
|
|
Its not mystifying. Its also not really worth caring about.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Mens Rights Activists won't be legitimate for as long as they continue to define themselves in opposition to women as opposed to realising that feminists are allies fighting against the same power structures. That said there's no conspiracy to delegitimise the issues facing men - you'll find highly respected and visible advocacy groups discussing all the problems men face that have been mentioned above. Also lol at anyone who has decided to tell people who is and isn't allowed to be a feminist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Treason Exposed! Hillary Clinton and Obama Used Benghazi Attack to Cover Up Arms Shipments to Muslim Brotherhood - Tea Party Crusaders
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:30
|
|
|
GreyPowerVan posted:if by "lick my boots" you mean allow for the fact that I am also a human being, then yes. I'm sorry, I was using "lick my boots" as a metaphor for "let me call myself whatever I want and generally do everything you can to make me feel like the most important person in the room just for showing up, to spare my feelings" No wait, I'm not sorry, not when women have been trying for centuries to be "treated as human beings," which includes a very basic concept of "Having a space where we are allowed to talk, and talk about issues that affect us, without a man barging in to tell us we're doing it wrong and we're not catering to him enough" Here is a space that maybe you don't get to fit in immediately, that maybe you don't get to run just by virtue of being a white dude. Deal with it. Or don't. But shut up and get out of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
Jim Gaffigan admitted to voting for Obama twice so let's see if he appears in any more of those Liberal Logic things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:38
|
|
|
Just asking questions posted:When you hear about the Holocaust, all you hear about is how 6 million Jews died. It was 9 million people. Many of those people were Christians.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:I'm sorry, I was using "lick my boots" as a metaphor for "let me call myself whatever I want and generally do everything you can to make me feel like the most important person in the room just for showing up, to spare my feelings" I don't see how "let me call myself whatever I want" means "make me feel like the most important person in the room for showing up". This is projecting. Men shouldn't be the most visible people in the feminist movement. They shouldn't be the leaders. The onus is on them to make sure their voices aren't dominating the discussion and they should respect autonomous spaces. That said all people should be able to self-identify how they want, feminist included. Its not that hard an idea to grasp.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:43
|
|
|
BUBBA GAY DUDLEY posted:Jim Gaffigan admitted to voting for Obama twice so let's see if he appears in any more of those Liberal Logic things. arent most comics pretty left-wing, with obvious exceptions like Blue Collar Comedy Tour? The ones that break type are usually vocal about it (Cosby, Steve harvey), this being the nature of comics who was propping jim gaffigan up as a right-wing icon
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
PupsOfWar posted:arent most comics pretty left-wing, with obvious exceptions like Blue Collar Comedy Tour? The ones that break type are usually vocal about it (Cosby, Steve harvey), this being the nature of comics A couple of his quotes were used on Liberal Logic because, like any good comedian, he poked fun at the current administration/life/etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
Defenestration posted:I'm sorry, I was using "lick my boots" as a metaphor for "let me call myself whatever I want and generally do everything you can to make me feel like the most important person in the room just for showing up, to spare my feelings" What does men calling themselves "feminists" have anything to do with what you posted here? There isn't any magic in the label. The person you've described here would still be just as lovely if they were calling themselves a "feminist ally" instead. Instead you would just be saying they're a lovely ally. Nothing would change besides the semantics. How do you feel about trans feminists? Under your label-policing is it okay if they call themselves feminists? If feminism is a movement that seeks to get rid of gender essentialism then defining who is or is not a real part of the movement based on gender essentialism seems counterproductive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
quote:Where is the Protestant Homeland? i think its uh Germany ErIog posted:If feminism is a movement that seeks to get rid of gender essentialism then defining who is or is not a real part of the movement based on gender essentialism seems counterproductive. it's not gender essentialism, it's asking white men to get the gently caress over themselves. this is why it blows up. if you ask a white guy "hey can you not make yourself the center of everything for once" tears start falling like rain as do accusations of excluding the very allies which are essential to progress blah blah white men have done so much for you ingrateful bitch blah blah like there's no greater testament to the necessity of feminism than the tendency of white men to betray their supposed stated values as soon as you ask them to sit in the back and shut up boner confessor fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:[Jews Jews Jews] I thought you were just making fun of the "what about men" feminism posts until it took that sharp turn into Elders of Zion territory. Where did you dredge that up?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it's not gender essentialism, it's asking white men... I agree that privileged people often have a problem listening and understanding they are not the center of every movement. I don't see how label-policing helps that issue, though. ErIog fucked around with this message at 03:23 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:19
|
|
|
ErIog posted:I agree that privileged people often have a problem listening and understanding they are not the center of every movement. I don't see how label-policing helps that issue, though. it doesn't, but it's an oddly petty thing to complain about. label-policing-policing
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:21
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it doesn't, but it's an oddly petty thing to complain about. label-policing-policing I only got into label-policing-policing because peter banana was openly advocating for label-policing. I still would like to know how peter banana feels about trans feminists. peter banana has real complaints about lovely feminists. That's fine, but the labeling is also an oddly petty thing for peter banana to be complaining about in comparison to the rest of the legitimate complaints. ErIog fucked around with this message at 06:52 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 17:24 |
|
|
Hi I am here because I believe in addressing the serious issues of gender discrimination that plague our society. Let's get started! Issue the First:  Some women are discriminating against me by denying my recognition as a feminist.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 03:27
|
|