Can you be for gender equality but not a feminist?

[TanithDaUnicorn]

I am completely for equality of all people ragardless of gender, sexuality, race, etc. But I don't like being a "Feminist" Mainly because in my opinion it focuses on Gender above anything else, and the fact that there are a lot of double standards when it comes to it.

What is your opinion? Am I sexist simply because I don't want to be considered a feminist?

The basis of feminism is achieving the goal of equal opportunities and rights for women.

There may be groups and individuals who feel that equality can only be achieved through women's solidarity, but that is not the same thing as feminism.

Well said uglyswan.
For example, as a feminist I will fight for a woman's right to access contraception and abortion, her right to autonomy over her own body and her right to make her own reproductive choices. In fighting for those
rights, I don't claim to speak for the women they belong to. If a woman doesn't want an abortion, that is her choice, but it doesn't give her the right to stop another woman getting an abortion.

I don't want to get into a debate about abortion rights, by the way - I'm just trying to use it as a example of one way you can support someone's rights without speaking for them. In the same way, I can support same sex marriage without speaking for gay people.

merrymouse
"There may be groups and individuals who feel that equality can only be achieved through women's solidarity, but that is not the same thing as feminism."
Interesting. For me, solidarity is an important part of feminism. I believe in supporting other women; I think that's both part of the feminist cause and instrumental in achieving feminist aims. I think we're stronger if we work together and support each other - not that we always have to agree with each other, but it's important to find common ground where we can.

"Interesting. For me, solidarity is an important part of feminism. I believe in supporting other women; I think that's both part of the feminist cause and instrumental in achieving feminist aims."
I agree.

Itll-
Can you say what bits of the feminist discourse you find difficult as the mother of sons?

OK, I can accept the bit about fighting for abortion rights etc, but a lot of feminism these days seems to be largely about perception, since in this country for example there are already laws which supposedly (although not in practice) guarantee equality.

The feminist discourse I have "ishoos" with is stuff like female only train carriages, the advice you see from women who call themselves feminists that basically tell men to constantly be aware that women are scared of them. If you (a man) have drunken sex with a consenting female, and she is also drunk then technically you raped her etc. Now i had plenty of sex when i was younger whilst drunk, at no point did i feel i had been raped or that the person (also under the influence) was a rapist. There appears to be serious thought given to an alcohol limit beyond which women are no longer able to legally have sex. I regard this sort of crap as at odds with reality and would not be happy with someone lobbying and attempting to legislate on behalf of me, as a women, along these simplistic lines.

Another example would be the whole terf stuff, which group of women, both claiming to be representative of the interests of women, and have the same name for those positions, really has my back ?

Do i get to adopt a position that i alone feel would help gay people for example, then label myself a gay rights activist ?

"a lot of feminism these days seems to be largely about perception, since in this country for example there are already laws which supposedly (although not in practice) guarantee equality."

This is contradictory. On the one hand you suggest inequality is a figment of feminists' imagination ("all about perception") but on the other hand you acknowledge that inequality exists ("laws which supposedly - although not in practice - guarantee equality"). If inequality exists (which it does), it's not just about perception, is it? It's about enacting the social change to ensure equality exists in practice as well as in theory.

The issue and debate about consent is not "crap". I think that teaching men and women about consent is beneficial to both. To me it's pretty obvious that with alcohol there reaches a point at which someone is too drunk to consent. They might have passed out, they might be semi-conscious, or conscious but not fully processing what is happening and whether they want it to happen. I find it abhorrent to think that anyone would WANT to have sex with someone who is not able to consent and actively participate. So does that make me a man-hating feminist? Er no. It makes me someone who will teach any future sons about consent.

TERFs are in the minority and are vastly outnumbered by more moderate feminists.

And no I wouldn't presume to call myself a gay rights activist because I'm not gay and I don't get involved in gay rights campaigns, but I do support them.

You see - no one is suggesting that having sex with someone who is comatose or unable to consent is rape. But like I say, i see it seriously debated that there is some sort of limit beyond which a woman does not know her own mind and might think she wants to have sex, but really there are societal issues that feminists are aware of and she is not the really mean she shouldn't be getting drunk and having sex, even if she loves it, is difficult to take seriously....that was too long a sentence sorry.

I'm not arguing against solidarity - just that it is possible to believe that women should have equal rights and opportunities without having any feelings one way or the other about solidarity with other women.

But then you also have to define solidarity - does it mean supporting others or is it about exclusion? In the context of feminism it seems to have different meanings for different people.

I think men can be feminists and you don't have to be an activist to be a feminist.

We can agree or disagree but nobody will remove our feminist membership cards because they don't exist.

Female only carriages was just an idea that someone floated as a suggestion to combat sexual harassment in late night trains- was it ever discussed seriously? Actually, I don't see a problem with reminding men that women are often wary of them- surely most thoughtful men would do things like not walking close behind a woman on her own at night? And as for consent- well, I am certainly in the process of teaching my son that active informed consent is a given, and drunk/stoned people cannot give active informed consent. I don't see a problem with that, either. Haven't heard about the legal limit for sex thing- sounds completely insane!

I very much doubt a feminist would argue that a drunk woman who consents to sex is not capable of knowing her own mind. I wouldn't be surprised if the person who argued that is more concerned with judging women for getting drunk.

The alcohol thing is still a red herring.

If you're about to stick a bit of you into someone else, you need to be sure enough that they want it and won't think they've been raped.

If DP and I are totally sozzled, and have sex, he knows that I rather like him, and am not going to feel that I have been raped.

If random dude I met at the pub has sex with me when we're both sozzled, then he needs to have done a bit more due diligence to be sure that I actually want to, and perhaps would be wise to err on the side of waiting until the next morning when we're both sober, because if I felt that he crossed a line, (in this theoretical world where people believe women this is) then I could report him for rape.

I think that's fair enough, I don't think it's hard to follow.

What happens now, is that women are already assumed to not know their own mind, and the establishment errs on the side of assuming they consented - which is just a free ticket to the type of man who wants to rape.

Oh, and I'm a mother of sons (both young) I teach them that they need to ask permission before they do things to other people, and that they should stop if asked.

I teach them that they shouldn't go around harassing people who can't say no (ie. babies, younger siblings), and they should think about how those people would feel about having food shoved at them or toys grabbed away.

I think this lays the foundations for healthy relationships in the future.

"What happens now, is that women are already assumed to not know their own mind, and the establishment errs on the side of assuming they consented - which is just a free ticket to the type of man who wants to rape."

Absolutely. The recent debate on consent has shocked some men in particular because it puts responsibility on them to ensure that there is active consent, rather than assuming there is.

I think the recent debate around active consent has been absolutely transformative and I wish it had happened 25 years ago when I was having casual sex.

I think having this debate will make things easier, not more difficult, for our young sons. I think it will also help combat the 'entitlement culture' we have in this country around sex.

I agree about consent and am 100% on board with everything that is said about enthusiasm and all the rest of it. I dunno, i do not want my sons to grow up feeling that they need to be ashamed of being men. That is probably completely not what anyone wants but getting put onto men only carriages, telling them they must choose the vacant seat next to man incase by taking the one next to a woman the frighten her, telling them they need to attend special "boys only" consent workshops when they are old enough so that they don't behave in a way that frightens their friends (some of whom happen to be female). This probably doesn't make a lot of sense and after criticising "perception" I'm aware that this is mostly just my "feelings" and worry about them. Even if there is active consent the position that if a girl accused one of my sons of rape, that I should believe her and not him and he probably did it is also never going to happen.

This is all slightly deviating from my original position which is that feminism itself is becoming so fragmented that endless debates go on about what it even means to be a feminist. If women do not feel that what passes for feminism represents their opinions, then i still stand by my statement that this is problematic and not something that can just be discounted. There is a feeling that if you do not subscribe to certain ideas, then you are not a feminist, that by behaving in a certain way you are "harming all women", that men cannot be feminists, only allies, even though feminists recognise that men would be required to implement (by which i mean manhandle and lock up the ones who "crossed the line") policies certain branches of feminism would like to see, that men must just do as feminists tell them. I feel deeply uneasy about quotas and the like and for the next generation with educational attainment and wages for young women now surpassing that of young men. There's the idea of "shared experiences of being a woman", but what if you don't feel those experiences are true for you, i could go on but probably should stop.

Another important thing to remember is that it isn't feminists that have made the discussions about consent and so on necessary- it's the way some men have behaved- and the way some men continue to behave.

I think the recent debate around active consent has been absolutely transformative.

Another important thing to remember is that it isn't feminists that have made the discussions about consent and so on necessary- it's the way some men have behaved- and the way some men continue to behave.

Absolutely.

If DP and I are totally sozzled, and have sex, he knows that I rather like him, and am not going to feel that I have been raped

I know what you are trying to articulate here, but isn't this the crux of the problem with consent - 'assuming'?? Surely he shouldn't assume anything, whether he be husband, boyfriend or casual acquaintance?

"Well, your Honour, she is my wife, so I thought it would be okay...' should never be an excuse.

itllallbefine sorry to jump in, but I just wanted to ask what you meant by

"I feel deeply uneasy about quotas and the like and for the next generation with educational attainment and wages for young women now surpassing that of young men. "

Are educational attainment and wages for young women surpassing men in the UK now? I thought there was still a pay gap, although narrowing? And I'm not sure about educational attainment either?

The law is around "freedom and capacity to consent" and applies to sexual assault as well as rape. A woman should not be sexually touching a man who is drunk beyond the capacity to consent either. (NB this is carefully NOT defined as a blood alcohol level as capacity can be impaired by other things)

"feel deeply uneasy about quotas and the like and for the next generation with educational attainment and wages for young women now surpassing that of young men. "

Are there going to be quotas? And do theeducational attainment and wages of young women surpass that of young men?

Lack of capacity doesn't mean "a bit pissed and overly frisky". It means a serious level of drunkeness - memory loss, unable to speak properly, wetting oneself, unaware of surroundings, unaware of being touched etc.

I think it's absolutely fine to give sons and daughters not to have sexual contact with such people! And that if they have any doubt - why not take a person's number and progress things another time? Why risk touching someone who isn't truly consenting?

Someone at double the drink driving limit, for example, is still very much likely to have capacity. Please do not give the impression that there's going to be a breathalyser test.

"Well, your Honour, she is my wife, so I thought it would be okay...' should never be an excuse.

Totally agree, and you're right - how I put it could be misconstrued.

DP is taking a risk here, that I perhaps may not have wanted to have sex, and absolutely, there are men that would take advantage of this, and it would be better all round if we waited until the next morning.

And yes, it also applies to sexual assault, and women should remember that too.

(lets be honest though.. we've got 2 kids, and been together 10 years - we don't get hammered anymore, and would be much more likely to fall asleep on each other!)

Sorry, missed the previous page. Mother of boys as well, for the record.

Swan, I owe you a reply