Do you think men can be feminists?

[AVirginLitTheCandle]

This may sound like a stupid question but do you think men can be feminists?

I've always thought they can be but I perhaps some radical feminists will disagree with me.

And why would you say that some who has sex for money is of lower value or quality that someone who does not ?
girl Seriously?
You're just making shit up now.
Which poster said any such thing?

I think there is a little nit picking going on because someone said that selling sex was "debasing".

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry at all these male feminists defending prostitution and porn.

I notice that none of them have commented on the use of language, or on housework or childcare.......

I can't decide whether to laugh or cry at all these male feminists defending prostitution and porn.

It's interesting that I have never said I am a male, that i support or defend prostitution or that I support or use porn. All i have done is point out that your definition of a feminist is not universal and that "other opinions are available" and for some reason this is "laughable". What's so funny about it ?

As to your point about housework - actually - what is your point ? If a man acted in these ways - would you be happy to call him a feminist or not ? Isn't that what they thread is about rather than whether people who claim to be feminist conduct themselves in a fashion that you deem acceptable given your ideas about what feminism should be ?

zsazsa

You are not seriously trying to tell me that feminists spend as much energy trying to promote scaffolding and mining or bricklaying as career options for women as they do for IT ? I think you are the one that needs to "come on".

"The very baseline definition of feminism must include not colluding with the exploitation of women and not directly or indirectly causing women harm."

Prove that Bertrand

Your use of the word whine reveals your views on feminism - and it is surprising that as a man, you decide to post on a feminist chat board and tell feminists they are 'whining'. What kind of man does that?

It was girlwithflaxenhair who used whine I have always assumed the poster is female.

I described prostitution as degrading and debasing. I think it debases human dignity generally.

"I can't decide whether to laugh or cry at all these male feminists defending prostitution and porn."

Already asked this before, show that that is true. In particular the prostitution part. I haven't seen that mentioned other than by you...it seems as if it's a standard line you bring because you are so used to men arguing for porn and also for prostitution at the same time that for you it's an automatic thing to bring up when talking about porn.

What I find is hilarious is that you and others all cry foul but never actually provide any evidence of supposed foul.

Can we expand a bit on the baseline definition?

I see global warming as a feminist issue. If the predicted consequences arise will they affect women more? I think they will.

I think the ongoing financial crisis is a feminist issue. Again, the resulting conditions (this "austerity") have impacted females more.

Globalisation has not been all bad, but with the acknowledgement that millions have been lifted out of poverty worldwide, worker's rights in the developing world are lacking. And I think that women are particularly vulnerable in this area.

So my thoughts are that the inclusion of men in the feminist movement can be helpful in addressing these sorts of issues.

My baseline is the choice made when voting.

""The very baseline definition of feminism must include not colluding with the exploitation of women and not directly or indirectly causing women harm."

Prove that Bertrand"

Don't have to. Self evident.

I am sorry, girlwiththeflaxenhair - I thought you had said you were a man on another thread.

"Don't have to. Self evident." - no, not that specific statement, but that porn necessarily is exploitation of women. In fact, you'd probably have an easier time showing men are the ones exploited. Because what you did is make a statement implicitly assuming something without showing it to be true.

The actual Bertrand Russell is turning in his grave.

Once again, men opining on what they believe feminism should be about. Because their opinions are so desperately important on every subject. Without any awareness of their male privilege or much knowledge of the basic tenets of feminism or many of the problems women face. Without the critical judgement required to tell who is really walking the walk when it comes to challenging the structural oppression of women as a class and without any real interest in doing so.

And that is why I don't accept men can be feminists. They can call themselves what they like, of course, just like they can say they are women, or the pope or whatever. I might even humour them. But I don't accept it to be true.

As I said, I'm suspicious of any man who is not happy being a feminist ally and demands to be called a feminist. He wants a say in what feminism is about, and I don't think men should have too much of a voice in it, frankly.

Your victim complex is mind-boggling.

The real Bertrand Russell would probably have proved the point by reversing it. The statement "pornography does not exploit women" is patently absurd. QED.

e.g. the fact i have asked multiple times and even said its what I find funny, that you make assumptions that all of the people here arguing are male without showing it (no one still arguing, i.e. not Dr M or dadbot) other than me has said they are male) and yet you and others still make the generalization that everyone arguing something you don't agree with is a "man telling women what to do". So yea, sorry but I won't bother indulging your victim complex venus.

Girl, I thought, said they were a man on another thread, which is why I made the assumption.

But you, as a man, seem very keep to argue in favourite of porn........

"The real Bertrand Russell would probably have proved the point by reversing it. The statement "pornography does not exploit women" is patently absurd. QED."

And again you make an assumption. It may be your opinion that it is patently absurd, but that means nothing. You might actually not be bad at reasoning and logic, but instead just so arrogant to think your opinion-based assumptions are axioms.

girl
You are not seriously trying to tell me that feminists spend as much energy trying to promote scaffolding and mining or bricklaying as career options for women as they do for IT ?

Nope.
I'm not seriously trying to tell you any such thing.
Not at all.
You on the other hand are seriously trying to continue to shift those goalposts.

Are you seriously trying to demand that equal energies must be expended on all initiatives simultaneously, or else all feminist endeavours in creating gender balance across such industries null & void?

You stated that you were unaware of any initiatives re scaffolding, I helpfully supplied you with evidence of one such initiative.
Rinse and repeat re mining (albeit a lowly non-profit organisation).

All of your "I have never seen any poster"/"I'm unaware of any initiatives" statements are subjective and you then refuse to concede when faced with evidence that actually your claims are erroneous.

I need to "come on"?
Thanks for the suggestion. I shan't be taking it on board.

Do you think that pornography does not exploit women?

Returning to the original question, or an extension of it...

I have been thinking of examples where men are tasked with leading initiatives meant to improve the lives of women, and whether they can succeed. For me, I think the shining example of all the ways that this can go wrong is encapsulated in what happened in Afghanistan in the early 2000s. A large part of the rhetoric for western intervention was not just about terrorism, but about revulsion for the awful stunted lives of Afghani women under the Taliban. What could be a more noble goal than to liberate them? Wasn't that the right thing, the humane thing, the only thing to do?

Of course, when push came to shove, it was more important to keep Karzai in power, despite his capitulation to the demands of hardline Islamic factions. Women were told to take a back seat, and when the main stuff was sorted out, and the country was stable, then they would be liberated as promised. It didn't happen. New legislation enforced once again the principles of segregation, male guardianship, moral criminality of women's sexuality, and the right of men to beat their wives. The lot of Afghan women did not substantially change, because it was too hard to do so and the political will to do so was not there. They were sold out. It was always more expedient to pretend that tribal culture was such that it could not be changed and it was pointless to try.

Intervention and aid could have been made contingent on reducing violations of women's human rights. Womens groups could have been supported. The fine rhetoric before the intervention could have been honoured, but it wasn't.

As well as being a betrayal, it's just shortsighted - when 50% of the population of a country is entirely disempowered and hamstrung, what can that country ever achieve in the way of improving the lives of any of its citizens?

Anyway, I thought it might be interesting to think about stuff like this when we're talking about why women are suspicious or cynical when we see men talking about women's rights. We've seen how it can play out.

In a more domestic and recent example, Philip Davies' appointment to the Women and Equalities committee springs to mind. He feels it needs "common sense" brought to it. I can't imagine why he thought it lacked such an attribute...?

I have met plenty of women who identify as feminists and support porn, enjoy porn, or even do it themselves. But I guess they are also just wrong, because your idea of porn and your idea of feminism are the correct ones?

Do you think porn exploits women?

Do you think that pornography does not exploit women? - yes.

Do you think that porn exploits men?

Ah. Then you're just in denial and it's not worth discussing anything with you. You probably think all prostitutes are doing it because they love sex and are using it as an easy way to fund their PhDs. Or are Happy Hookers shagging a few carefully selected men in their charming Mayfair apartments before drifting off to the opera.

hilbert are you a 'men's rights activist '?