to think the 'F' word is one we should be proud of......

[PosieComeHereMyPreciousParker]

Thanks to MN, especially dittany, Lenin, BoF and Anyfucker, I have been made aware of my casual attitude to misogyny. This short journey in my reclaiming my old values recently lead me to the London Feminist Network Conference on Saturday. And Oh my God it is one of the most inspirational things I've ever done.

Having money and being relatively attractive in my younger days I was mislead into thinking that being a feminist was irrelevant, after all we had a female PM and then 'girl power' where we were fooled into thinking with the right body shape and a little wit the world was our oyster (farm).

My husband's and friends' response to my recent activities have ranged from being mystified to mockery, from resentment to full on stereotypical prejudice. I am alarmed that barely any of my friends think feminism is relevant.

Am I being unreasonable to reclaim the word feminist to mean a person that wants to rid the world of gender prejudiced?

I think more young men than young women kill themselves, I'm not sure how that pattern plays out later in life (when more older women seem to suffer from depression). I would have no problem whatsoever with groups targetting men and highlighting suicide as an issue in young men. It's a fact.

However suicide is very different to the other things we are talking about here. Suicide is not usually something that is imposed on people, in the same way that biases in law are for instance.

What about the point I made on recognising that there are individual circumstances but also systematic imbalances of power?

I think you'll find that organisations like the Samaritans and MIND have recognised that male suicide is a male issue and there may things which are specific to depressed men, that have less impact on depressed women, and run campaigns to do something about that.

The fight is not over for the civil rights movement is it? Ask New Orleans residents whether or not they think the President would have taken so long if they were a nice white neighbourhood.

"Any existing prejudices can be experienced by anyone" - what? Really? I'm likely to be picked on for my sexuality am I? (Straight)

"When society is as unconscionably inequitable as that" - that "when" applies to now then doesn't it, as you acknowledge it is the situation in e.g. the Sudan "today". So if you were Sudanese would you be an active feminist, do you think?

TheShriekingHarpy wrote - "Men have a greater propensity for suicide than women, so equally, should that translate to a male issue? Or would that derogate and detract from the suffering experienced by women who attempt suicide?"

One of the myths about feminism is that feminism has a stranglehold on men's ability to improve e.g. men's health, denying men permission to set up their own men's issue campaign groups. Ironically, feminism's powers do not extend to preventing many men forming a multitude of anti-feminist men's groups to campaign against feminism.

Does the extent of inequality really matter TSH? Surely if anyone is disadvantaged in these kind of ways we still live in an unequal society and people wanting to change that should be celebrated not sneered at?

I'm also wondering if you could elaborate on how the idea that legislation existing to safeguard rights has changed things so much that we don't really need to do anything else fits in with libertarian ideals?

And surely the very fact that specific legislation to safeguard the rights of certain groups is needed is proof that the society is not at all equal and some groups are at risk of coercion or oppression. And assumes neutrality of government and judiciary, which is something I believe most libertarians would question?

My perspective is that most of our rights have been won in the last 100 years. They can and might be rolled back again in the next 100. Was talking to some others on Saturday about how every time it seems as if feminists have "won", what we've actually done is managed to halt a retrograde step. We are running to keep still and we need a hell of a lot more people on board if we actually want to drive things forward.

Gee thanks Dittany.

Gosh there are a load of big words in this thread which I don't understand, - I'm off to find a libertarian to help me make sense of them..

I don't know if you're being serious or not sally, but I haven't got a clue about this libertarian stuff either

I feel a bit irritated after writing about how feminism and libertarianism can and should (from the libertarian perspective) be linked to be told to bog off.

I'm not trying to convince any feminists that they should abandon their own political ideals - but to suggest to TSH and anyone else with those views that this doesn't mean they can't be feminist as well.

I tend to agree with a lot of what you say Dittany, but I don't agree that feminism has to be linked to the political left (or right for that matter).

The underpinning principle of libertarianism isn't that individual choice reigns supreme, but that choices should be made without force and coercion. If someone claims that means 'I'm going to do whatever the hell I like and not care about anyone else' then I'd suggest they aren't following a libertarian political ideology but are just a selfish individual. And if their choice to do whatever take away someone else's liberty then they certainly aren't libertarian (as the term is used to describe the political ideology)

sorry, brief hijack. It's old but I love this article breaking down liberalism as displayed by misogynists.
rageagainstthemanchine.com/2008/09/19/bill-mahers-a-liberal-that-means-he-supports-your-right-to-suck-his-dick/

oops

Only to the same extent that socialism is one ideology and feminism is another. If you can have liberal feminists, or socialist feminists who see a path to equality could be acheived through legislative changes within the current system - then you can have libertarian feminists and anarcho-feminists who see ways that their own particular political preferences could also achieve an equal society.

Equally you can have socialists who are also misogynist and libertarians who are also misogynist.

Libertarians want the state to butt out because the state uses force to create things like the NHS. The threat of prison for non-payment of taxes is force. You can't opt out of paying taxes if you agree not to use the NHS. So suggesting libertarians make the choice not to use these things isn't really a valid argument because the state will still use force against them.

I'm sure I won't convince TSH to see how well feminism can fit with libertarian values, given the history of other debates. However if someone else reading who isn't aware of that thinks, 'oh, I certainly identify with the libertarian position on many things so perhaps I shouldn't try to get involved with the feminist section/organisations' then maybe reading about how the two can fit together will be more likely to help further equality than suggesting they should bog off.