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.

That's just your victim complex talking, Sparrow.

But seriously, you hit the nail on the head with that.

Well i'm a bit out of my depth - but Bert doesn't your description tweak existing structures seem to make you not really radical ? This goes back to what i was getting earlier about feminism being a movement to effect social and political change....it's unlikely that any political movement will really catch on when you have a leadership which actively excludes people who will be affected by that change. i.e. at what point does a feminist proposal get taken to "the man in charge" and at what point is he allowed to have an opinion and argue about it ?

Devi

Not sure about your point regarding Mugabe - if a revolution excludes some citizens because they are white and the revolution is about making things "fair" then it would obviously be bad....which I think is how most people regard Mugabe, in contrast to the more inclusive Mandela who is revered for not excluding his oppressors.

"I think most radical feminists just want to advocate for the needs of women and centre women. They examine the structural problems faced by women as a class. They're not plotting to overturn the current patriarchal society in a coup d'etat."

But when every structure is so deeply entrenched in a way that opposes our goals...

These are dark, terrible times. We are seeing regression on so many fronts. With climate change, we are seeing the very structure that keeps us alive compromised. With democracy itself we are seeing Donald Trump. As toothless as "inclusiveness" may be, even that is being erased.

Revolution perhaps would produce even worse conditions....they often do.

And if we are left with a gradualist approach, isn't a broad front a requirement?

I am thinking of things like the basic income concept. There are experiments running and proposals in Scotland. Are these the types of areas we could find common ground?

I think that's more to do with you not understanding feminism than it is with bert not being radical.

The whole point is the "man in charge" aspect. It needs to be "person in charge" and they need to be deciding based on what's best for society as a whole, not a "man in charge" deciding based on how that decision affects them.
No feminists are advocating change to damage men. It isn't about men. It's about women.

If you can move your mind away from the zero sum game men vs women to a society that's about people regardless of their gender/sex you might start to get the nuances of what we are saying.

If you believe that we don't need to change the "man in charge" model then there is no way you can be a feminist of any kind

Girlwith, the point about Mugabe was made to counter your post where you, personally, said that no black activists actively want a revolution. To make your claim that radical feminists are the only activists who do and therefore it's reasonable for men to expect input into feminism as it would concern them, when white people don't expect input into black activism as it doesn't concern them.

Which is a flawed argument. As several people pointed out.

**LassWiTheDelicateAir

I don't know who first came up with TERF and it would very unfair to say it was liberal feminists**

According to the feministgeek wiki, a liberal feminist blogger called Viv Smythe claims to have invented the term in 2008.

Is that unfair?

I suspect 95% of the population have no idea what it means. Personally, I'm not sure what to make of the whole transsexual rights movement.

I have a friend in her 50s who is a happily married lesbian that spent her teenage years thinking she should have been born a boy - in the current climate she might have been pumped full of testosterone, given a double mastectomy and called herself Jim. Since she has been 100% happy as a woman since she came out in her 20s, I think the whole explossion in teens having hormone injections and surgery, and the barrage of advocacy that encourages them to do so is worrying.

Morning!

Surely the question of who can be a feminist is subservient to the bigger question: What is feminism for?

If feminism is a club, for the airing of views, for the sharing of experiences, just like this forum. If it is a platform women to talk and listen about the experiences of women, then, I guess, it is legitimate to expect all its members to be women.

But, if feminism is a force for change, which I think it is, first and foremost. If it is about advocacy, empowerment, equality and education, then its priorities must be communication and engagement. That just doesn't work if you exclude men.

Sorry but it's true.

Who is suggesting excluding men entirely? They are welcome to offer their support as feminist allies.

"black people as noted earlier want equality with whites" Hmmm. Not sure about that. And I'm not presuming to speak for black people here but I think like women (or the feminist movement) a lot want freedom from oppression. Sometimes that is described as equality. But you can't have equality without freedom from oppression. Inevitably some of that will involve a "revolution" and has. Devi has highlighted Mugabi. I also think Martin Luther King was pretty revolutionary. Obama - a black president of the most powerful country in the world is pretty revolutionary (and perhaps even more so Michelle Obama).

I'm wondering what you think of as a revolution? Fundamentally changing the core of our constitution and democratic system to allow women to vote was pretty revolutionary. As was the Equal Pay Act. Not all revolution involves murder and overthrowing governments. Changing/dismantling our core systems and beliefs is pretty revolutionary.

Requesting that women are "empathetic" with our oppressors (as please hlepme was advocating) is the very definition of male privilege. Ultimately men don't have to put up with sex based oppression every day. It is all pretty theoretical for you girl. You can and do opt out and I think that this is why you and other men can't ever be feminists. Just allies. And that is why wasting our time and energy on threads like this is pretty shoddy behaviour and male privilege in action.

Who is suggesting excluding men? People on this thread have been suggesting lots of ways men can get involved, but with honourable exceptions they don't seem to want to.

Maybe it's just symmantics, but words are symbolic, and the symbol of a female-only talking club is to me how a male-only drinking club might appear to you.

Perhaps because they expect women to treat men as badly as men treat women? A really really good point.

You're having fun with this straw man, aren't you, girlwith? As I said, no one is offering radical feminists the chance to remake the world

It isn't a straw man argument. Radical feminism was defined as a desire to see a total societal change away from a patriarchal structure that favours men to a structure in which gender doesn't determine your outcomes in life

Whilst it might be said that no one is offering it the ultimate aim per the definition above is to achieve a total societal change. How you propose achieving that if you refuse to engage with around 50% of society?

I think it's very interesting, this idea that women must coopt mens support to live as fully functioning adults

Girl didn't say that , that is an over dramatic and petulant response to her points.

I presume the name BertrandRussell is ironic right? You know he was a infamous for letching on female students for decades, right?

and the symbol of a female-only talking club is to me how a male-only drinking club might appear to you. And I think that illustrates SparrowHawk's point quite nicely!

It is all pretty theoretical for you girl. You can and do opt out and I think that this is why you and other men can't ever be feminists

I don't think Girlwithflaxenhair is a man ?

Scallops: "Requesting that women are "empathetic" with our oppressors (as please hlepme was advocating) is the very definition of male privilege. Ultimately men don't have to put up with sex based oppression every day. It is all pretty theoretical for you girl. You can and do opt out and I think that this is why you and other men can't ever be feminists. Just allies. And that is why wasting our time and energy on threads like this is pretty shoddy behaviour and male privilege in action."

Ok, if it's just a club you want, fair enough, i get it. But don't pretend that you want change. You want a club to talk. Clubs are great. I have no problem with clubs. But If you want change, you should be inclusive.

Feminism isn't a club. And that's not what I said.

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that this club mentality is what's holding back feminism as a political movement. Interesting

Are they not Lass? I thought they'd already declared being a man on another thread. Apologies if not. Point still stands for men though.

Girlwith, the point about Mugabe was made to counter your post where you, personally, said that no black activists actively want a revolution. To make your claim that radical feminists are the only activists who do and therefore it's reasonable for men to expect input into feminism as it would concern them, when white people don't expect input into black activism as it doesn't concern them.

A revolution that aims to sweep white people out of power and seize their property has "nothing to do with them" ? That is my point - unless you think that Mugabe really is a "black activist" and that he was correct in excluding whites from the "social changes" he made in Zimbabwe/Rhodesia. Your position that people should have no interest in movements that patently do affect them is what I'm arguing against !? If feminism is just a bunch of woman chatting about stuff then fine - i see no reason to include men. If feminism is a movement which aims to restructure our society, then it's never going to happen when men are not allowed to have a say in how that should be done, they should just get on with doing what we say....

Would you argue that Mandela was sucking up to his oppressors in allowing whites in post apartheid SA to be involved and discuss what the future society might look like ?

Maybe it's just symmantics, but words are symbolic, and the symbol of a female-only talking club is to me how a male-only drinking club might appear to you.

That's because you haven't thought about it, or you are being wilfully ignorant.

A male-only drinking club excludes women from an organisation that can have an influence on the direction of businesses, government, local employment etc. Think about the freemasons or golfing/strip club networking. Those decisions are likely made subconsciously and the men involved don't realise that they might disadvantage women.
A woman's group either doesn't have the power to make changes, or if it is a feminist group it has the specific desire to make changes to improve the lot of women and so is talking about an action plan to do that. It is consciously focusing on the needs of women.

lass girl is a man who works in technology. Confirmed by him on various threads before. In this case we aren't calling a woman a man just because we disagree.

Girlwith, the point about Mugabe was made to counter your post where you, personally, said that no black activists actively want a revolution. To make your claim that radical feminists are the only activists who do and therefore it's reasonable for men to expect input into feminism as it would concern them, when white people don't expect input into black activism as it doesn't concern them

Well a Mugabe style of total societal change is hardly one most people would recommend as opposed to Mandela's style.