Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



MegaZeroX posted:

Personally, I identify with the egalitarianists. I believe that there are stereotypes and discrimination against both men and women in western society. In order for things to improve, there can't just be a group advocating only for women or only for men. There needs to be a group advocating for both. I know someone will probably say "but feminism stands for both male and female equality." In definition, yes. In practice, no. I don't see feminists arguing to make it mandatory for women to sign up with the US selective service. I don't see feminists trying to get rid of the belief that men hitting women is bad, but women hitting men is OK. I don't see feminists trying to get men and women to serve equal prison sentences. The same goes with the MRM/MRA with women, but they usually don't pretend like they support female rights.
It seems your main criticism here is that feminists aren't setting out to make it so that women get these negative consequences apparently from being male evenly and obstinately applied to women.

The selective service is effectively dead barring alien invasion or some dramatic huge breakdown. I imagine the opposition to expanding it to include women would be just as much "why do we have it at all" as it would be "WOMEN CAN'T SERVE IN THE COMBAT ZONE BECAUSE REASONS."

I have literally never seen a feminist advocate for it being OK for a woman to hit a man. I have seen arguments explicitly defending a woman's right to physical self defense against a man, but this was more that case of the woman who got 20 years for a warning shot. That's as far as it has gone.

I also haven't exactly seen feminists arguing for maintaining lengthy prison sentences for men - save, I suppose, in the sense that they would like to see rape trials have a lower chance of being dismissed for random and arbitrary reasons.

In essence it feels as though you have had the word "feminist" poisoned for you by assholes, whose goals probably included "poisoning the word feminist like we poisoned 'liberal'," but have essentially a feminist perspective. If feminists do not focus on men's issues it is probably because the Supreme Court is not eagerly rolling back elements of legal equality for men for arbitrary and stupid reasons, at least at present.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Nessus
Dec 22, 2003

After a Speaker vote, you may be entitled to a valuable coupon or voucher!



MegaZeroX posted:

Right. So I think that feminists, in order to deconstruct gender, should try tackling it. Isn't feminism all about trying to get rid of gender roles? If you are going to demolish the building that is sexism, you need to take out more than just one side.
Well, can you blame them if they're addressing the side that's telling them they can't make major medical decisions for themselves and that various forms of subtle discrimination are OK, and not putting a lot of focus on the side wherein there is a vague sense of a double standard?

Of course it is understandable that this particular issue may loom large in your own experience, but your experience isn't really the point here.

  • Locked thread