Feminism

[slightreturn]

Please feel free to express your views honestly re; Feninism.
What to men really think about it?

re atheism debates I mean.

Yes I think so Sprogger, also I think it is hard for men to come around to because they have something to 'lose' (preference).

Absolutely agree re the habitual ridiculing of faith in certain MN threads. Much more extreme than the abrasive tone towards men by some posters in feminist discussions and massively subverting of genuine discussion.

Well, lets also not turn this into a dissing of "strident" posts elsewhere either - I really just wanted to bring a point of principle/analogy in. This has been a v friendly thread so far!

I think sprogger it depends who is doing the asking in part. For a lot of blokes. I wouldn't give a care, some may indeed see it as un-masculine and we are bombarded with the expectations of being a little bit tastefully butch.

yes hab - such an impressive thread.

Yes, apologies.

sprogger - I once I was a feminist man on a thread on MN. Got roundly attacked by certain feminists and told that because I was a man I could not be a feminist because I could never understand what being a woman was like. I was told that all I could be was sympathetic and to shut up and listen.

That was annoying.

Although in another thread I was told by another MN feminist that I clearly supported the physical abuse of women.

That was upsetting.

"Would a reason why men would find it wanky to identify themselves as feminists possibly be because it would cause the same discomfort as being called a "girl?"

Calling a man or boy a "girl" is always an insult - it's a way of degrading his masculinity. Is "feminism" offensive to men for the same reasons?"

I think this might come into play, however i have also heard people joke that a man would declare himself a male feminist so that he can get women. Also feminism to many men seems as though it is against 'them' who would want to call themselves something which in their view sees them as an enemy based on their gender alone.

Many simple are not interested, also many will define themselves as 'equalists' they are after all male so male interests will also be important to them which feminism is not there for.

I guess men who willingly label themselves as a feminist are much more open the question "so how do you practice that?" We can all call ourselves anything we wish, and it can remain undisturbed in our heads.

I suppose what's particularly interesting about the word feminism is that it has few parallels - you can be a gay rights activist, or anti-racist, but not an anti-racist, etc.

I think the question of whether you can only be a feminist if you're a woman is kind of interesting in an abstract sense, but a bit of a side issue. Personally, I think men can and should be feminists, just as people should support gay rights and be opposed to disability discrimination. In the end, it's what you do and how you raise your children that matters, and spending time nitpicking over why you're not a feminist because of "some of them aren't very nice" isn't terribly productive.

Or rather - what Pan said, like.

Pan's point is good. Perhaps feminism doesn't just lable a sey of beliefs but a certain practical commitment. Like identifying oneself as 'green'.

A consequence of that is to make me reflect shame-facedly on my own feminism, which has never been activist enough.

sprogger - feminising compliments to men - "my you are sensitive to others aren't you?" - "you do dress well, nice fabric matches" - " I like your inclusive style" - " you have fantastic arse"....

So... strident... what does that mean?

And can men be strident?

I do think talk of whether men can be feminists or not slightly angels on pinheads tbh. I don't really care if they identify as feminists or not, I just want them to recognise that women are fully human and value them because of their femininity as much as they value men, not in spite of it.

I think I have fallen in love with Robert Jensen. He is perfectly marvellous. I would offer to be his groupie, but I know he'd disapprove.

sprogger - I scan read the Jensen article and agree with what he said. I would agree if it had been written by a woman or someone who described themselves as feminist.

Is he a feminist? I am not sure. I am sure though that he is not that kind of feminist that attacks men for being men. Hence I felt drawn into his arguement and engaged with it.

BB, most feminists don't attack men for being men. That's a real straw man.

I used strident in a rather tongue-in-cheek fashion, HerB, but yes, I think anyone can be strident. It's a perjorative term; I don't see why it can't be used to diss anyone, frankly.

This idea that men don't buy into feminism because it's not a consistent and unified movement. Or even that because Man A does not (in his mind) discriminate against women, therefore feminism is not needed really frustrates me.

It feels like another way women's views are considered less important, "oh well, they can't even define feminism so really, do we have to take them seriously."

There's lots of chats on this thread justifying why individuals, men and women, don't feel the need to be feminists but none of them are because, "I don't see that women are treated any differently or discriminated against and here are my reasons why".

How shallow is that? Because some women who are feminist are unlikeable, therefore the entire movement is invalid and the issues they're fighting for should be ignored.

I would love to hear all these non feminists explain an actual reason to not be feminists that covers a belief that either a) women are not discriminated against or b) that it doesn't matter because really, women's issues aren't that important.

And I feel okay being "strident". I personally experience sexism every single day. Until that stops, I can't help challenging anyone whose reasons not to support the broad ideal of feminism are vague, wooly and based on feeling upset that a woman shouted at them once.

I asked this earlier but no one has given any examples - who are these feminists who attack men just for being men?

I have never come across any. Except maybe in the early 70s a woman who set up the organisation SCUM (Society for Cutting Up Men). But her name escapes me and I've never been quite sure if she's just an urban myth or a joke.

Andrea Dworkin is the major feminist often accused of hating men just for being men. But if you actually read her work, she um... doesn't. She attacks men who have a sense of unwarranted entitlement, men who are violent, men who believe they have a right to rape women, etc. But I have never read anything by her that attacks men purely and simply for being men.

Oh, great article, if so hard to read. Ugh.

Hab - I have only ever heard women being described as strident. And it is usually in connection with either feminist views, or other political views. (No one has strident views on the superiority of L'Oreal over Max Factor for example, even if they express them extremely emphatically. But if they have decided opinions on tax, they are strident.)

Well, me too - that's why I chose to use that word in my comparison. Why shouldn't a man be described as strident in the same way as a woman? I was being very deliberate in my choice.

I have a suspicion that the physical appearance of Andrea Dworkin has something to do with the antipathy towards her and the ease with which her views have been misrepresented and those misrepresentations believed. But maybe I'm thinking too poorly of a lot of men in doing so.

'Bitter' is another word almost always applied to women, and usually in connection to rejection by men, rejection of relationships with men or a relationship with a particular man.