Are you a feminist, if yes, what does it mean to you?

[YouAreNotBatman]

YANBU = I’m am
YABU = I am not

Well, yes. Honouring the work of the women of previous centuries who fought for the rights of women - writing books, forming protests, dying perhaps - so that women could have basic rights such as the right to vote.

Women who fought for women to have a bank account in their own name. To have access to contraceptives, legal abortion, and counselling. The women who set up rape crisis centres for women and girls. Who spent their whole lives making safe places for women and girls to flee to, from domestic violence. The women now carrying on their work.

The women then and now lobbying for equal pay in various industries notorious for massive disparities in pay. The women who commit their lives and safety to protecting girls from genital mutilation.

That sort of thing.

Whoa, sorry. I was trying to delete some predictive text and I somehow at'ed someone.

Anyhoo. Selective Service is not a big deal but it should be eliminated in favor of a more efficient program that includes women.

The rest about SAHM's just reminds me of Phyllis Schlafly and The New Right. Which is also popping up on the FWR forum. So depressing.

I'm genuinely not sure you're willing or able to understand the concept but I gave it a good go despite you repeatedly saying that people's experiences they shared are fantasy or untrue aka lies.

Misunderstandings (for want of a better word) aren't the same as lies.

If somebody grows up to believe that they can't do xyz because they've been told this, they may then internalise that belief and genuinely come to believe it. It may not be true, but they're not lying because they genuinely believe it. You could almost call it 'internalised feminism'.

One of my biggest gripes with a lot of modern feminism is that it often disempowers women rather than empowers them IMHO. They're told they'll always be playing second fiddle to the men, and taught to be pessimistic. To be otherwise would almost nullify a lot of feminist discourse due to it's inherent foundation of being based around oppression.

Anyhoo. Selective Service is not a big deal but it should be eliminated in favor of a more efficient program that includes women.

It's the principle to me.

Imagine if it was 'OK ladies. If you want the same state benefits that men get, you need to sign this agreement which says we can send you off to war if we need to. It's not likely we'll call it in, but we need your signatures nonetheless.'

I reckon there'd be outrage.

I don't reackon there would be at all. In fact, I think it was proposed about two years ago. Selective Service is not the draft. It's just a list. There isn't even a requirement to update contact information or whereabouts. It's a relic from the fifties, before there was any kind of data base of the country's population. If anything, it's less intrusive than the census. We should replace it with a national database of all citizens and issue national ID cards. We could solve the voter id issue and how to keep track of fighting age population in one fell swoop.

It's really weird that anyone in the UK would get into the Selective Service debate, it's just really not even a thing even in the US. Especially in modern life. All of that data is collated on Spokeo. We live in a world where everyone is listed somewhere.

The only time it ever comes up is on the red pill reddit thread.

Selective Service isn't an agreement and men don't provide signatures acquiescing to be sent to war in exchange for state services. It's more like a roster. The government can draft anybody they want whenever they want. Signature or no. Fun fact, SSA has always had a section that tracks specialized medical qualifications. But you don't have to sign up for it, they cull that information from licensing boards. And it includes females.

Silly example but I'm also looking at Ukraine and thinking I wouldn't want to be a man there right now.

Just going into work right now, but you're right, it is a silly example.

You think you want to be a woman in Ukraine right now?

Google Russia, rape in war. The Russian army is notorious for the scale of rapes after world war 2 (read A Woman In Berlin for an eye-witness account) and it's not looking like much has changed.

@YesJess

No, you said:

Same with all these stories about wolf whistling builders etc. Most of them are just pure fantasy

And stuff like

No offence, but these are just made up situations though

You now say:

Misunderstandings (for want of a better word) aren't the same as lies.

If somebody grows up to believe that they can't do xyz because they've been told this, they may then internalise that belief and genuinely come to believe it. It may not be true, but they're not lying because they genuinely believe it. You could almost call it 'internalised feminism'.

I've directly said that I HAVE experience cat calling, men beeping their cars and harassment on the street, and witnessed my 12 year old god daughter having some of those experience already.

So when you say this is a fantasy and then that it's down to me internalising feminist beliefs and thinking I've come to believe I've experienced things I haven't... you're accusing me of saying something that isn't true.

Stop patronising me please. I'm a grown woman sharing my personal experience and being told that it might be because I've internalised stuff other people have told me.

The men who did those things are real, I am real, my god daughter is real and the situations of harassment I described are real.

And @YesJess I agree with PP, some of your arguments are ever so red pill / incel / MRA, especially the repeated references to selective service type systems and the idea that lots of women secretly want to be a 'kept' woman, that they benefit from rich husbands so are lucky - even if they do all the childcare etc:

That, coupled with you telling women that their experiences are internalised feminism and not a reflection of reality, even when they've shared specific personal experiences, makes me think you aren't here in good faith.

The same thing that is happening to me right now. You feel very frustrated and angry most of the time. It isn't pleasant.

I'd rather be raped than dead.

I agree it isn't a race to the bottom but minimising the objectively worse physical harm that men suffer in just about every facet of public life really doesn't help.

Lots of things stopped me thinking of myself as a feminist but one of the key moments that got the cogs turning was getting in a row with my teenage son about who should walk to my mums late one night. It's a very long story in terms of why we were in that situation but the short version is either me or my 18 year old had to walk 20 minutes at 12am while the other waited at home. The journey would take us past a rowdy pub and down a few dark quiet roads. DS was absolutely adamant that it was unsafe for me. He was incorrect, statistically he was far far more likely to come to harm than I was. He actually laughed when I pointed this out, he was so confident that I was the one at risk. I think if younpicked any random mother and 18 year old son and put them in our situation the majority would have the same experience.

I discussed with my feminist friends and the explanation from their pov seemed to be that society paints women as inherently vulnerable thus limiting their access to public life... and yes.. I kind of get it... but... at the result of this cognitive dissonence is that men are more likely to come to harm. In other words (as I appreciate I am likely being quite garbled here) the idea of men as being able to "look after themselves" and women being "inherently vulnerable" harms men more, far more I would argue.

I think the focus is on the attacker

In both cases it's men who tend to commit the attacks

Further it is felt that men have a "fighting chance " whereas a women would not - making it unfair in society eyes

Although I think that phrase fighting chance in itself almost supports violence - just ways in which out society was formed on the back of people fighting each other

Anyway my point is , yes male violence is bad, as is male mental health and any number of things . These have a different but related cause to the problems women face - domestic violence , dismissed as less capable and so paid less etc . Racism is also bad. But I can't focus on all bad things and so I focus on women because it's usually the one that gets expected up take a back seat - because you know men have problems too , as you just demonstrated

It just began to seem really arbitrary and even selfish to continue to centre women in my politics. You say you recognise racism but choose to centre women. I was the same but I just couldn't justify the choice anymore.

I don't really see why that incident would turn you away from feminism. We don't want women to be infantilised. It seems to me that your objective assessment of the relative risks and rejection of well meant but rash male protection was entirely congruent with feminism.

the idea of men as being able to "look after themselves" and women being "inherently vulnerable" harms men more, far more I would argue.

I like your agreement but the idea that it harms men more than women is (I think) mistaken. Because what it does is to restrict women's lives, not men's. We talk about "public life" but that's not the only thing. When I go walking - in daylight, in popular walking locations - I see more men than women, and I see men out alone, but I see no women out alone. I walk past men fishing and I wonder how long a woman would get to sit by herself without interference or harrassment from passers by. I go walking in the park at night because I need the exercise, most of my friends would not go out alone. Sometimes there are women alone with dogs, but it's only men walking the dog in the nature reserve at 10pm.

A lot of women would say, but I don't want to walk by myself, or walk the dog at night, or spend the day fishing. When you live inside the restrictions you don't see them.

I don't use the phrase "centre in my politics" - and I don't like it because of the implications

When it comes to politics there are a lot of factors that I consider - economy for one

I don't consider feminism as the centre of my world or politics

But a focus on feminism to me makes sense because - (at least until very recently: depending on definition ) - I was one which makes my experience a valuable thing to contribute whereas the benefit I could bring to other possible causes is less .

I can't be a role model for a none violent male. I can be a role Model for a gender boundary breaking female . So I put my effort on something that is as important as other things but where I can actually make an impact . I can't fix the world but I can help a bit in this one area.

But also I don't think feminist means activist

It can just mean supporting the principles

And I can support multiple principles all at once

So just because I am a feminist doesn't mean I don't also support say a male
Mental health charity in my local area

I have considered this but I don't agree. My aforementioned son didn't go out more or less than I did as a teen. His pattern of going out with friends was similar to my own. Going out alone and meeting friends somewhere.

I've never heard of a man being attacked fishing. I am sure if I Googled it I would find some examples but I would imagine statistically it's inconsequential compared to being attacked in the street. I hear of a lot of men being attacked in the street and despite knowing a lot of men who spend a great deal of time fishing I have never heard of them being attacked. Now that nay be just anecdotal but I am confident it would also be factually accurate.

I see tonnes of women out alone. I don't drive and spend a lot of time walking (alone) and on public transport. I imagine the area plays a factor here though so I don't think our individual experiences count for much in that regard. My area is what could be charitably referred to as rough as fuck.

All that to say I don't think the over repsentation of men being the victims of assault and murder can solely be accounted for by saying "they go out more".

Well I think statistically women do go out and about alone much less than men especially at night when alcohol fuelled attacked are more likely

But I suspect you may be right - after allowing for all factors men may get attacked more - factors including subconscious alpha male challenging behaviour , alcohol intake etc

It it doesn't mean there is no need for feminism

It's not a race to the bottom - who overall gets attacked more - and it's not just about stranger violence either

I think men overall are more likely to be victims of assault but women are far more likely to be sexually assaulted. It is sexual assault that has a bigger effect on behaviour e.g. not going out on your own, late at night etc

But who is making the “hands on dad” remark? Women. Men don’t really say that kind of thing about other men.

And I think that's valid. My other political beliefs just clash with feminism too much.

I look at an issue like male violence and think actually men are suffering more than women as a result of this. Then I realise that the question of who suffers more in terms of gender/race/sexuality etc is actually futile. The question that needs to be asked is who benefits. The answer to that is predominantly rich white hetrosexual men but I think the white heterosexual men part is basically irrelevant, they operate not to benefit other white people or straight people or men but only to benefit wealth.

I haven't read the entire thread. I grew up an old school 2nd wave feminist and that is at the root of my beliefs: people shouldn't be discriminated against based on their sex. But then, that extends and becomes, i guess, intersectional because people shouldn't be discriminated on because of their race, religion etc. Or disability.

And the more i read and the more i have read i realised that actually, the real struggle is against not only the patriarchy, but it is a class struggle.
So probably a communist.

The notion of "gender" gets on my tits, frankly. I was reading a thread on twitter about making a gift package for a newly out transwoman. And the thread highlighted my biggest problem with being trans-anything: I am not defined by my gender because it IS a social construct. It is a collection of ideas about how someone should behave based on their sex. And because i am a football season-ticket holder who likes heavy metal and DIY i should hand in my "girl" card and become a man. Which is clearly bollocks, even though i can't put my finger on what makes me a woman outside of my biological sex (demonstrated by my ability to have given birth several times). First and foremost i feel like a person with wants, needs and wishes. And they have nothing to do with my sex.

Of course and I said that. There is another aspect to my perception of this. On a very personal level the majority of my family and on particular my younger family are male. I fear the harm and potential done to them much more viscerally. That isn't the sole reason I have disassociated myself from feminist activism but it certainly played a role in shaping my thoughts on the subject.

I have nothing against feminist activism in a micro sense. Just like anti racist activism it can achieve great things on a very practical level to improve people's lives. In a broader/macro sense I think putting divisions in between us won't help in the long term.

Like I said, I am very far left. In the true sense of the word that is, not what passes for left wing in the media which is post modern Liberal bollocks.