Feminism's many branches
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-08-2015, 09:01 AM
RE: Feminism's many branches
(18-08-2015 07:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(14-08-2015 11:28 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  But what is the entomological equivalent of feminism?

Worker bees? Consider

Ya beat me to it.

But I was going to mention the praying mantis but that's from a different branch (or brach, to highlight Bucky's other typo) of feminism.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-08-2015, 09:24 AM
RE: Feminism's many branches
(18-08-2015 08:16 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(18-08-2015 07:45 AM)Chas Wrote:  Worker bees? Consider

Those ladies don't take shit from *anyone*.

And they're willing to die for the cause!

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 06:07 PM
RE: Feminism's many branches
I like to think of myself as more of a egalitarian a person who truly believes in equal rights rather than a feminist. I get what feminists are trying to do but it's like they want special rights for each gender such women being able to slap a man and the man not slap back, meanwhile if one man hit another man you can bet a fight would happen I see that as feminisms biggest flaw
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 06:39 PM
RE: Feminism's many branches
(20-08-2015 06:07 PM)ForsakenHeretic Wrote:  I like to think of myself as more of an egalitarian a person who truly believes in equal rights rather than a feminist. I get what feminists are trying to do but it's like they want special rights for each gender such women being able to slap a man and the man not slap back, meanwhile if one man hit another man you can bet a fight would happen I see that as feminisms biggest flaw

I would disagree with your example since I have never seen or read any feminist organisation or thinker suggest such a stark example (there is a lot to debate in there and a lot of sexism underlining it in my opinion). You could apply the idea of «special rights» to reproductive rights or more specifically abortion where women should hold more power than men on that specific issue. This is pretty much the only circumstances where I have seen most feminists’ thinkers and movements declare a «special privilege» which is of course directly linked to the higher risks and responsibility women have on this issue. Of course that's withstanding Marxist-feminists.

The difference between gender equality and feminism is the following. Gender equality is a philosophical/legal statement. Men and women command the same amount of power, respect and authority. That's what gender equality means when we declare it. Feminism is a philosophical/political/social movement that strives to reach gender equality between men and women in the context of a patriarchal society (like ours for example). Gender equality is a statement while feminism is a movement dedicated to make that statement real in patriarchal society where men command more power, respect and authority.

In my opinion, you can be in favor of gender equality without being a feminist in the following circumstances:

1) You live in a society where gender equality is demonstrably achieved (this is not the case in modern western society)

2) You live in a matriarchal society. (Feminism was named by women who wanted to affirm their rights in a society that denied them. The etymological history of feminism wouldn't make sense in a matriarchal society so another name would have to be given to a mirror movement).

3) You personally consider and treat gender has equal in a patriarchal society or historically patriarchal society, but refuse to actively promote that idea in the wider social arena and aren't invested in the issue intellectually.

If you don't think you fit in one of those three category, I would label you a feminist. This doesn't mean you can't disagree with a lot (if not most) feminists. This thread demonstrate that reality pretty well. I personally despise Marxist-feminists and wrote pages to denounce them, but they are still marginally better than those who still advocate sexism.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes epronovost's post
20-08-2015, 07:15 PM
RE: Feminism's many branches
(20-08-2015 06:07 PM)ForsakenHeretic Wrote:  I like to think of myself as more of a egalitarian a person who truly believes in equal rights rather than a feminist. I get what feminists are trying to do but it's like they want special rights for each gender such women being able to slap a man and the man not slap back, meanwhile if one man hit another man you can bet a fight would happen I see that as feminisms biggest flaw

Where do you live where you proclaim a man hitting another man making certain you bet a fight would break out? That's far from anything close to how people actually act.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 11:39 PM
RE: Feminism's many branches
(20-08-2015 06:07 PM)ForsakenHeretic Wrote:  I like to think of myself as more of a egalitarian a person who truly believes in equal rights rather than a feminist. I get what feminists are trying to do but it's like they want special rights for each gender such women being able to slap a man and the man not slap back, meanwhile if one man hit another man you can bet a fight would happen I see that as feminisms biggest flaw

That is not feminism Rolleyes Let's say I'm advocating for gay rights, does that somehow imply that I'm advocating that everyone else should be discriminated against?

It's amazing how this ridiculous strawman version of feminism seems to have taken hold.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2015, 11:50 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2015 11:56 PM by Gilgamesh.)
RE: Feminism's many branches
(20-08-2015 11:39 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(20-08-2015 06:07 PM)ForsakenHeretic Wrote:  I like to think of myself as more of a egalitarian a person who truly believes in equal rights rather than a feminist. I get what feminists are trying to do but it's like they want special rights for each gender such women being able to slap a man and the man not slap back, meanwhile if one man hit another man you can bet a fight would happen I see that as feminisms biggest flaw

That is not feminism Rolleyes Let's say I'm advocating for gay rights, does that somehow imply that I'm advocating that everyone else should be discriminated against?

It's amazing how this ridiculous strawman version of feminism seems to have taken hold.

It is a general statement, and thus not a strawman, especially since there exist people who do identify as feminists who do indeed advocate for special rights. If you insist that these are not feminists, then a fallacy is being had, but it is not the man of straw.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 12:01 AM (This post was last modified: 21-08-2015 12:09 AM by RocketSurgeon76.)
RE: Feminism's many branches
What special rights?

I don't know any feminists (and I know quite a few) who say that a man shouldn't be able to defend himself if attacked by a woman. What most feminists who talk about men hitting women are talking about is the astounding rate of domestic violence that is epidemic in our country, and many others.

(Edited to correct spelling error of consequence.)

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 12:09 AM
RE: Feminism's many branches
(20-08-2015 11:50 PM)Gilgamesh Wrote:  
(20-08-2015 11:39 PM)morondog Wrote:  That is not feminism Rolleyes Let's say I'm advocating for gay rights, does that somehow imply that I'm advocating that everyone else should be discriminated against?

It's amazing how this ridiculous strawman version of feminism seems to have taken hold.

It is a general statement, and thus not a strawman, especially since there exist people who do identify as feminists who do indeed advocate for special rights. If you insist that these are not feminists, then a fallacy is being had, but it is not the man of straw.

So because some gay rights activists think that 'straights' should be shackled together and made to work in a chain gang, saying that all gay rights activists are represented by these people is not a strawman? It is a strawman, and you're a twit.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-08-2015, 12:26 AM (This post was last modified: 21-08-2015 12:39 AM by Gilgamesh.)
RE: Feminism's many branches
(21-08-2015 12:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  So because some gay rights activists think that 'straights' should be shackled together and made to work in a chain gang, saying that all gay rights activists are represented by these people is not a strawman? It is a strawman, and you're a twit.

I don't think that; no.

But if there were people who were gay right activists who held that sentiment, it would be a no-true-scotsman to say that that sentiment represents none of the gay right activists.

As for special rights, there is the example epronovost gave, where some feminists advocate for extra reproductive rights. (And I do think it is fine and fair that women have certain rights that are unique to them, such as in the case of extra reproductive rights.)

Edit: I have a weird relationship with the no-true-scotsman. An identifier (like feminism is) can mean as little was one single affirmation; People who are wildly different in their views can and do share a common label - and there is always going to be an "extremist" fringe, but depending on how small (and I think the number of feminists who want unfair special rights for women are pretty low) I think it can be disingenuous to apply a no-true-scotsman. I don't think it should really be applied here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: