Silly question maybe - can a man be a feminist?

[biryani]

After a few glasses last night I got into a discussion with a male aqcuaintance about childcare etc. This man claims he's a feminist because he shares childcare etc with his wife, and has read Naomi Woolf and Andrea Dworkin. I said something like " you can't be a feminist because you're a man!", meaning that feminism arises out of a specifically female take on the world and that a man cannot experience this, being a man, and therefore cannot be a feminist as such although he may empathise and understand female issues.

now sober, I'm not sure. Who's right?

Pointing out that some men who claim feminism haven't lived up to their claimed principles doesn't equal saying all men who claim feminism can't live up to their principles.

"Pointing out that some men who claim feminism haven't lived up to their claimed principles doesn't equal saying all men who claim feminism can't live up to their principles."

Exactly, ir's not.

So why are you all going on about that rather than the question of can a man be a feminist?

Trillian, I was responding to Reality's post: "I really REALLy dont' like teh point made earlier that male feminists are in fact evil."

I have already responded to the original post.

RealityIsRoughlyTheSizeOfABoat wrote - "No one's said, actually mate, I'd rather you used the term pro-feminist, ta muchly.

In fact all I've seen is 'waaah, all male feminists are MRAs and Rape Apologists' which is a bit shit, really."

Which thread is that? It's not the one I've been reading. I've seen :

"I'm in the pro-feminist camp."
"I'm also of the pro-feminist camp."
"I am in the pro-feminist camp, definitely."
"I'm more comfortable with men identifying as pro-feminist."
"of course he can identify as a pro-feminist man"
"I agree with the idea that men can be 'pro-feminist'"
"I'm more comfortable with men identifying as pro-feminist."

What is the difference between a feminist and a pro-feminist?

Is it only that one is a woman and the other is a man? Or do the two have different beliefs or ideals?

reality, dadof was banned for posting in detail about his use of porn and how he uses it to wank (including how many times, what kind of material gets him off etc)

there was also a rather distrurbing part where he said he realised when the person on camera may be being abused, but because it "didn't do it for him" he merely clicked to the next image

and then he continued to justify why using porn was ok

not acceptable on a parenting website, and I for one, am glad MN made a stand on that

So is that a "yes, it''s because they are men"?

That seems rather counterintuitive to me. We are fighting for women and men to be regarded as equal, and yet some people want to have two different words for people who share the same beliefs and ideals just because of their gender?

oh, and since then, he has offered to pm other posters about hwat xactly it was that got him banned

hence my comment upthread last night

what exactly

Reality Sun 26-Jun-11 11:16:40
"Yes I think men can be feminists, and most of the men I know are."

Have I just been really unlucky then? Or am I just making the whole women-as-an-opressed-class thing up?

We have to move away from the idea that because we personally know some decent men, that we can call them feminists and therefore call most men feminists.

We all know some decent men. So if we add 'em all together, that's quite a lot, right?

But. But, but, but....The pay gap doesn't exist because of some weird little in blip in the evolution of the universe. Rape isn't a natural phenomenon. It is something that men-as-a-group do to women-as-group.

Your mate John thinks the pay gap is really bad. So does your bother. And so does your partner. It's only a handful of right-wing loons who would say that the pay gap is right and fair.

But if your mate and your brother and your partner (and my mate and my brother and my partner, and Trillian's mate and her bother and her partner, etc) are doing nothing to actually challenge the pay gap, then they are responsible. I don't see how they can call themselves feminists, while reaping the benefits of women being an opressed class and not actually acknowledging or challenging that, I really don't.

The entirity of feminism is not invalidated because some blokes you know personally really love their mum.

I think that to be a pro-feminist man you have to be actively supporting the feminist movement. This doesn't necessarily mean attending marches - it can start by calling other men out on sexist behaviour.

I find it a uniquely modern idea that a member of the privileged group cannot be identified as also being a member of a group seeking to redress the balance.

Would you say that the White men (and women, but historically it was the men who made the legal impact) who were abolitionists actually weren't, but were in fact simply pro-abolitionists since they hadn't experienced the day to day life of slavery? One could argue that since all slaves had a vested interest in abolition, that the word abolitionist could be synonymous with the word slave, rendering it a bit redundant and meaning no one was truly an abolitionist, they were just either a slave or pro-abolition.

It seems utterly ridiculous to me to say a man cannot be a feminist because he isn't female. That is discriminating against someone based purely on what is between their legs. Surely that goes against the core principle of feminism which is that all people are equal regardless of genetalia?

A man can be a feminist if he believes that women are treated unfairly purely because of their gender.
He can be a feminist whether he actively campaigns to make changes or simply goes through his life treating women equally to men and not buying into patriarchal views.
He can be a feminist arsehole if he treats everyone around him as lesser beings regardless of gender.

The same is true of those 3 statements if you change the gender and pronouns to female. Or if you change gender to race. Or sexual orientation or any other dividing aspect you care to name.

It is pretty funny to see women going to bat to protect male interests by arguing that they should be considered feminists or actually that they have a right to be considered feminists because men and women are equal! How very feministic to want to advance male rights and privilege. Irony, anyone?

I can't help thinking this is yet another example of women being indoctrinated by patriarchy. If you really can't see why a man shouldn't be accorded the same status as a woman as a feminist then you've bought into the patriarchy's argument about equality -that it applies to when it benefits men, even if (or maybe because) it can help suppress women further.

White, middle-class, educated men without a disabilty (for example) can argue that equality can apply to them, that they should have the same positon, les's say, as disabled men in a disabled rights group because they care, they've read books, they are opposed (angry even) about discrimination against people with disabilities. But if you accord them that equal status, then you disempower the disabled men, who then cannot even have control and authority within that very specific group.

Why not imagine that one day we can have a society that has equality between the sexes. Once we have that, then maybe we can revisit the 'men can be feminist, too' argument. We'll all be dead, of course...

floyjoy, one could argue it's pretty funny to see feminists who argue that men and women should be treated equally think that in order to achieve that, men and women shouldn't be treated equally.

It's also pretty funny (in a peculiar rather than ha ha way) to see feminists trying to exclude people, rather than encouraging everyone to join the fight for equality.

I would argue that it's not too dissimilar to the Popular Front of Judea and the People's Front of Judea. Can't we all just get along and fight the common enemy? (The People's Popular Front of Judea)

In this currently sexist world, men who declare equality for all put their own groups before women e.g. socialists put women's rights below the rights of cash-poor men.

Until women and men have equality, perhaps men could be pro-feminists rather than feminists, to help women reach equality.

After women and men have obtained equality, men could be feminists, so that all feminists can then fight to keep equality.

Bennifer Mon 27-Jun-11 12:53:13
"one could argue it's pretty funny to see feminists who argue that men and women should be treated equally think that in order to achieve that, men and women shouldn't be treated equally."

Look, if I thought - if I thought for one second - that by calling all the men (who aren't Jeremy Clarkson or actually in prison for rape or violence against women) feminsts would engender true equality then I'd do it in a heatbeat.

Stop telling woman that we're being unfair for not letting men into feminism. I'll do you a deal. You let me into your higher pay club and you can join my feminist club, ok?

It's not women's responsibility to make men feel welcome in feminism and give them a big badge saying 'I Am A Feminist, Aren't I Great?' so that then - and only then - men will consider paying women the same as they pay themselves.

Because it would be impossible for them to just look at the pay gap and do something about it because it is obviously the right thing to do, right?

Here's what I think is funny, Bennifer. I think the fact that you think feminists are being the unfair meanies is funny.

I'm not telling women (as a group) anything. Why would I? I'm only speaking for myself as a woman.

I don't feminists are being unfair, I might think some are.