Are there any forms of consensual behavior that would 'disqualify' someone from being a feminist?

I should add due to that party having several mp's voting against things like the equality bill, and a lot of bizarre things from American 'Conservative feminists' you hear.

I would think you can, yes. What do you think, BD?

Can you be Conservative and feminist?

And yes Tony Blair a socialist? Bwa ha ha ha

Socialists are not homogenous and never will be certainty is always a bit suspicious to me... Debate is healthy.

Hi Vesuvia - for me Socialism is a more complete philosophy on a practical level it allows analysis of society and a critique of the economic structure that we live under. Without the dismantling of the capitalist system then no individual will be truly free. So feminism without socialism would not resolve all the problems I see in the world as it is now. You can be a liberal/ conservative etc and still identity as a feminist.

If I wanted to stand for election I would not stand on a purely feminist platform, but I could stand as a socialist. That is my world view, feminism informs my view and socialism underpins it. Hth.

I beg to differ, Tony Blair may be many things but a socialist he is not.

bigmouthstrikesagain wrote - "Women are not a homogeneous group. It is self evident to me that a Feminist in rural South East India has a different agenda and priorities to a feminist in western Europe (for example). There is a combination of complex social/ economic and ethnic influences that needs to be accounted for feminism is not meaningful without context, in my opinion. So I identify as a socialist first and a feminist second."

Your comment suggests to me that context and diversity are larger stumbling blocks for you in your feminism than in your socialism, causing you to prioritise your socialism over your feminism. If this is indeed the case, I'd be interested to read more from you about why you have taken this view.

As you'll already know, socialism includes the beliefs and actions of various historical periods, ideological strands and social cultures. A list of socialists can include:

Nelson Mandela, Julia Gillard, Stalin, Pol Pot, Dubcek, Gorbachev, Tito, Harold Wilson, Mitterrand, Castro, Golda Meir, Tony Blair, Indira Gandhi, Gerhard Schroeder, Rosa Luxemburg, Ho Chi Minh, and Karl Marx,

So, is socialism really more homogeneous and context-free than feminism?

I have mentioned this before, but XH once asked me, after watching a programme on the subject (don't ask, I didn't), whether I knew that I should wipe my arse after defacating from front to back? I was, at that point, around 45 years of age.

He would also advise me, on going to London (which I did five times a week for over 30 years), to look both ways when crossing the street and not to give my handbag, or the baby, to a stranger to hold. As you do.

Of course, silly me. Amazing I was able to even get dressed this morning without a man telling me what to wear, and tying my shoe laces for me.

Oh come on, wickedlazy, can't you see that we need men to tell us that we're Doing Feminism Wrong?

*Surely not that

As per encouragement...!

If feminists cannot come up with some kind of working model of behavior and continue to individualize themselves to the point that everyone is doing something totally different all the while equally empowering

Working model of behaviour? Like a set of rules and regulations that dictate the ideal of how women should act?

Is that not what feminism is about combating? That woman should be equal to men/treated like men, and we can do whatever we want, even individualise ourselves while empowering ourselves?

Don't know much about feminist theory and haven't read any great feminist works, but even I can see the op is talking out his arse.

I'd say it's time for The Image, HoVis.

Yes, HoVis, please do! Btw, none of the texts I have suggested is particularly dense.

What a pompous little tit.

Go on HoVis, hit it!

will

This is an online community. Communities - online and off - have their own practices, norms and even rules which newcomers adapt to. It is in absolutely no way your place to dictate what is and isn't appropriate.

R.e. your friendly warning regarding dense texts - I don't include myself in this, but many people on this board are extraordinarily well-read, understand feminist theory extremely well, and also have a great talent for explaining it in a way that non-experts can understand. I have benefited hugely from reading their thoughts and explanations. Perhaps you might benefit more from approaching the things they are saying from a position of humility, rather than assuming you are in any position to tell them how to discuss feminism?

Is it time for my favourite FWR image to come out yet?

Women are not a homogeneous group. It is self evident to me that a Feminist in rural South East India has a different agenda and priorities to a feminist in western Europe (for example).

There is a combination of complex social/ economic and ethnic influences that needs to be accounted for feminism is not meaningful without context, in my opinion. So I identify as a socialist first and a feminist second.

The above is to give context to my answer as op seems rather pedantic. I believe that there is no definitive way to answer the question posed in the op as there is too much context required in analysing an action/ choice made by a self-identified feminist that may seem 'anti-feminist' at first glance. If I am a SAHM and I do all the cooking - that may be because I am a surrendered wife who thinks her DH is the king of the house etc. or maybe I am living in a town to far away from readily available work, unable to drive and with children with SEN that make childcare choices more complex... I may make a decision consensually with my partner to do things and our choices are constrained by our personalities/ where we live and what our economic status/ level of education is... The male partner may well be as constrained by these issues as the female but it may be expressed differently.

Feminism should be a tool to analyse the relationships between genders on our planet - not a weapon to judge or belittle choices and it should be a positive force celebrating and empowering - which does not need consensus just recognition of different needs.

Basically, if I read it right, the argument is that feminism will get nowhere until all its proponents agree what it should include and what its collective views are on each item. Only when we can agree exactly what it is we all want will we be able to go forward and make it happen. Well, that should keep the little women effectively off the streets for another millennium or so.

What a good thing the entire rest of civilisation didn't wait for consensus before trying to achieve anything at all.

Buffy, facilitate?

Sag mal, Alter, geht's noch? Bist du wirklich der Meinung, irgendeine von uns ist dir irgendeine Erklärung der Hintergründe ihrer politischen Positition schuldig oder hast du wieder mal Farbverdünner aus der Flasche gesoffen?
(don't speak Welsh, but would still like to contribute.)
OP, I have tried to be polite and I have tried to be helpful but you are obviously just an arrogant little shit with too much time on his hands.
And really? A set of rules governing all behaviour for all feminists, no matter what their political, social and economic circumstances? No sweetie, that's fascism, not feminism, wrong f-word.

O, rhaid i fi ymarfer fy Nghmrhaeg. Syniad da.
(Oh, I must practise my Welsh. Good idea.)