to be depressed that only 9% of women identify as feminists?

[parklyfe]

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/only-7-per-cent-of-britons-consider-themselves-feminists/

''When split out by gender, women were more likely to identify as feminist, with nine per cent using the label compared to four per cent of men.''

I haven't RTFT and have no time to, but Mephistopheles your example of "extreme feminism" was somewhat like describing anorexia nervosa as being on a diet. It's not. It's disordered thinking and behaviour and clearly not coming from a place of wellness.

Thanks for explaining, Tea and everyone else.

I suppose like everything there will be people out there that actually do believe these things..

The men in camps comment was linguistic hyperbole. You've got to be wilfully or terminally thick to take it seriously.

The SCUM manifesto and PIV = rape are thought experiments. They're deliberately provocative in order to springboard a discussion on wider issues.

Xposted with everyone!

Only managed to plough halfway through this thread, but given that this 'statistic' has been reported by the Telegraph (which, as we all know, is just the Daily Mail with a public school education), isn't it a possibility that their sample may be a teeny bit skewed?

It depends on your definition of feminism? I hold doors open for whatever gender is behind me and expect the same in return. I do not expect women that take time off to have children to climb the corporate ladder as quickly as others that do not.

It's disordered thinking and behaviour and clearly not coming from a place of wellness.

I hold myself to a standard of discourse where I do not dismiss someone's expressed perspective as being a result of insanity simply because I find their views repugnant.

My views on sexist jokes extend to sexist thought experiments. Roosh V (a man who represents the vilest of my sex) likes to do thought experiments too. Either his are as acceptable as Ms Solanas, or they are not.

*or neither are. Oops.

"Bert isn't it rather poor form to link to another thread with exact times a poster has posted? No wonder people name change.
Surely you can just debate and disagree what has been said on this thread?"

It may be poor form, but not such poor form as coming on here and completely misrepresenting what was said on the thread concerned for a new audience, so it will go down in people memories as thousands nasty feminists being all aggressive and throwing vitriol around, when it was nothing of the sort. As I said, I have had enough of feminist bashing.

limitedperiodonly
So no one should make a joke in case it's misunderstood fasicle?

I thought that was the kind of thing stony-faced extreme feminists said.

How did you get that from my post? Not what I said at all.

I said this:
It's hard to separate the jokes from the other nonsensical, off the wall points which I think are supposed to be serious.

Which means there's a lot of other stuff in the article which could be interpreted as a joke - it's hard to tell.

I don't identify as a feminist, or indeed as anything - I think it is rather sheep-y to identify as a member of any group. I identify as the person with my name.

that comment from Caitlin Moran is really rather foolish. Shouts out the 'all men are bastards' thing. Quite insulting for the one she lives with.

Surely you can just debate and disagree what has been said on this thread?

I agree Itsmine and that was done on the other thread.

Unfortunately someone chose to bring that thread up on this one and misrepresented it calling it vitriolic and saying a poster who was incredibly civilised was 'jumping on' her.

That's unfair and justifies a TAAT IMO. Bert is just putting that straight and has referred to the relevant posts to save people the trouble of wading through the link. It's helpful of her seeing as some people have complained about the difficulties of reading links.

bert I wouldn't say there was vitriol.

But I was told I was making things up and then had several posts twisted. When people backed up what I said, they were told they had imagined it

It wasn't really a reasoned debate either. In parts, yes not in all of it.

"got a vagina? Want to be in charge of it? Congraulations! You're a feminist!" is the Caitlin Moran quote, if I have looked back over the thread correctly? Can you explain how it "shouts out the 'all men are bastards' thing", SpecialSubject?

Feminist has been a dirty word since it was invented, thats the real problem.
I'm a feminist, I always have been, I expect women in civilised countries to be treated with equality and respect. (Well I'm allowed to dream, arent I?)

I think as earlier posts have suggested (before the bunfight), it's partly the word that puts people off. My mum would not identify as a feminist but she would say she believes in equality. A feminist perspective intrinsically implies a one-sided perspective (to many people).

What bunfight?

Why has everything got to have a bloody label and people get so militant about it. J

Why has everything got to have a bloody label and people get so militant about it.

Some people need an enemy to feel purpose, and a label gives you the opportunity to define yourself as having an opposition (whoever has an 'opposing' label).

A feminist perspective intrinsically implies a one-sided perspective (to many people).

If feminism is weighted towards women's equality, that's only because women have been the ones discriminated against over history far more than men.

I don't identify myself as feminist in the same way I don't identify myself as mother, white, english because although they are undoubtedly true, I don't see them as the core of my identity. These things aren't 'who I am', they are just labels.

What does "identify as" mean?

I've seen it used for "identify as (conservative/moderate/liberal)", "identify as (religious belief/agnostic/atheist", "identify as (sexual orientation)" and "identify with (ethnicity)".

Is it intended to mean that you can "call yourself" or "say you are" a feminist but that doesn't mean you actually are one, it's just your best guess? That could be seen as patronising. Or is it meant to imply that what you "identify as" is what you are, whether or not anyone else agrees? Or that the definition of a feminist is whatever you make it?

Itsmine at the risk of seeming childish: the other poster did it first.

She misrepresented the thread, her treatment on it and the behaviour of another poster - that was the most disgraceful thing IMO. That person was blameless and shed light onto a case that had been carelessly introduced by the first poster (I'm trying not to name names here - perhaps I should get all legal and talk of Poster A and Poster B).

As for talking about a court of law...Poster A was the one who spoke of being a solicitor, which led at least one other poster (Poster C?) to give more weight to her assertion about the tribunal than was justified.

I don't want to bang on about it, but if you don't challenge these things when they arise, they pass into more myths and legends about 'the time when those horrid feminists were horrid to me'.

The kindest thing to say about Poster A is that she was mistaken. As a solicitor, I'm sure she knows what I mean by that.