What does someone actually mean when they say "I'm not a feminist"?

[TheFeministParent]

For me it means that either:
a) they are a man
b) they think feminist means militant lesbian
c) they think feminism has no relevance.

ISNT I fit your description then but fear that would not be 'enough' for some hence many women being reluctant to say they are in case they aren't 'doing' enough.

I think that living with a certain set of principles is fair enough, and will reflect in how you deal with others.

I don't think that it is fair to say that people don't care about things they don't get actively involved in. When we did that charity thing there were about 100 different great charities, people can't be actively involved in each and every issue, but I don't think that disbars them from saying they care about them.

I think it means that they either wax or shave their legs

I don't find that either waxing or shaving my legs is in any way inconsistent with a feminist way of being, therefore I am happy to call myself a feminist.

I suppose that might be what this thread is about.

I might variously say that I care about - I started a list but realised it would be endless! In the UK and outside there are hundreds if not thousands of things I care about. All of those things are compatible with me also caring about improving the lot of women worldwide.

So I suppose it seems odd when people are happy to say that they are for or against pretty much anything you care to think of, but when feminism / women's rights are mentioned people are so careful to say "NO! That is most certainly not for me".

I am happy to say I care about the environment, even though some environmentalists are quite bonkers, and about animals, even though some animal rights people have done appalling things, and so on and so on. But many people seem keen to do everything they can to distance themsleves from feminism / women's rights - even though when you talk about specific problems the answer is yes of course they think that's terrible.

I think that's what people find strange.

One question: On these "discussions", do you ever actually try or think you might enlighten some of the "stupid and submissive" types (apparently me ), or is it merely a gathering of like-minded people getting together do talk about what you believe in, with the odd insult thrown in?

I'm almost ok with the latter - even though I do think it's laughable when others are written off as stupid or shallow when a considerable percentage of posters go around like children, insulting anyone that might disagree with them. Still, if it wasn't really meant for any outsiders to read, I guess it matters less. Note that I say "considerable percentage" - some on here, but the minority, seems genuinely willing to discuss what they believe in, and I have respect for that and do read and think about their points.

If however it was meant to spread information, to inform those less, oh, I don't know, probably intelligent (again, I tend to disagree with that, but hey, what do I know?), it's backfiring.

I choose not to associate myself with bullies.

Oh, and lastly, before the big assault which I know will follow on my post - to whoever said there are no women in charge of big companies: Uhm, you are wrong, do some research. Pepsi, Yahoo, Xerox, Craft, etc. Not merely enough, of course (I seem to remember 15 - 20 out of Fortune 500), but when you argue a case, at least get your facts straight. So yes, way too low, but no, not none. And on a very, very, very lower level, I have always appointed people on merit, whether man, woman, sexual preference, skin colour, whatever. I have been "lucky" enough to be treated the same. I must be a freak of nature. But still stupid.

I haven't said that anyone is stupid or submissive. I talked about my two friends who are self identified non-feminists and I don't see anything wrong with what I said in those posts.

This is the feminism / women's rights section though so I think it is reasonable to expect that people will be approaching things from that perspective. Much as the green/environmental section attracts people with certain views and if people went in there saying that they thought that environmentalism was stupid and loved their gas guzzling cars they would not get a top reaction. Why the expectation that things should be different here?

missal do you see no problem for women when you look around the world?

ISNT, I didn't refer to anything you've said, so no, I can't see anything wrong with what you said either. I do actually have respect for what you say.

And yes, I do of course see a problem for women when I look around me. And I do my small part in trying to get this to change. Employment aside, I will, and have, also make an official complaint if outside of my control, or discipline anyone that makes discriminatory or insulting comments at work (like the ex comment above). I have discussions with friends and colleagues when I think they might be wrong or misinformed. I don't go around insulting them though - it stops people from listening.

With regards to this being the feminist / women's rights section - I do believe in women's rights, which is why I read this thread when it came up on Active Conversations. I just don't believe this is the way to go about it if spreading of information or persuasion what the aim. But fair enough, I will hide the topic if I wasn't actually meant to read or contribute.

Oh my goodness, I can't keep up (other than seeing that I am doing a disservice to my children - but hey-ho. They'll probably rebel and become feminists or lefties or something).

Beijingaling's post struck a chord with me from my 13 years at a girls' indie school. It never, ever occurred to us to think that we were not as capable as men in any respect at all. In the absence of boys, we did everything; there was no sense that there were 'boys' subjects/careers' and 'girls' subjects/careers': everything was possible.

And, no, age and experience has not taught me otherwise.

What I do think, though, is that nobody ever told us that we would need to think carefully about how we could also combine being a nuclear physicist with being a mother/partner.

None of us would have described ourselves as feminists. We'd have thought they were hairy lesbos.

I am finding all the comments here very interesting.

Of course anyone can read or post here, I was just pointing out that people shouldn't be surprised when the majority of views are from a feminist viewpoint, or that views which are hostile to women/feminists are strongly challenged. Don't hide it!

Have you read any other threads in this section? There are a wide range of topics discussed and most threads are civilised chat and discussion, just the odd one gets a bit shouty. But people are passionate, I guess that's where the shoutyness comes from.

Yes that's fair enough Hope.

Thanks for the reply ISNT. No, I haven't really browsed this topic much - have read one other thread, which, if I remember correctly, was interesting. However, any insults was frowned upon by the majority, much in the same way that breastfeeding campaigners won't allow insults towards bottle feeding on threads as it alienates those needing the actual information. If I knew how this would be, I would have stayed away completely, but instead opened as it sounded like an interesting thread title.

mjinsparklystockings wrote - "Ive only read the start of this thread and I have to say if these sorts of comments are indicative of how "feminists" feel towards other women, then I am sure glad I dont consider myself to be one."

I hope you can find the time to read the whole thread.

Why can't you challenge individual posters about any posts you find offensive, rather than assuming they speak for everyone here?

Can someone please direct me to some internet discussion forums about politics that don't contain at least one insult?

If I thought that some posters spoke for the whole of Feminist thought on mumsnet, I would definitely be hiding the topic.
However, there are an enormous number of fascinating, thought-provoking and well-constructed posts that don't attack those that either don't understand or don't agree. So that's why I keep reading.
And occasionally interrupting.

Yes, but vesuvia, in the better ones the majority would try and dissuade someone from making cheap insults, whereas here it was just ignored as if everyone agreed, which I know isn't necessarily the case.