Feminism as "let's be nice to everyone"

[OneFlewOverTheDodosNest]

I've started getting the rage with celebrities and women I know who like to virtue signal about the importance of feminism, but then make the definition of feminism so broad that's it's useless.

Some things I've seen lately that have made my teeth clench include "feminism works for all genders", "feminism is another word for equalism", "we can only make feminism work if we get men on side, so let's be nice to them" "here's a list of things feminism works on for men" etc etc.

One thing that REALLY pissed me off was Emma-Feminist-Watson (I know...) saying that boys not being able to cry was the "saddest thing" she could think of and it just really brought home to me how feminism has turned from this fight to liberate woman, to this platitude designed to show that you're nice but "don't worry, not in a threatening way". Seriously, you can't think of a single thing SADDER than a bloke being emotionally stunted?

How did it happen that mainstream feminism started focusing on the emotional needs of men, rather than the increasing rates of DV and sexual violence? How did the conversation shift from "we need to fund these shelters for women" to "we need to make sure men have refuges [that never get used]"?

I disagree with many women about many things. Hell, I disagree with many feminists and even occasionally roll my eyes at what they claim is feminist. What I don't do is tell them that because they make feminist choices that they can't be feminist. I don't micromanage how they look or how they have sex. I am not a gatekeeper. Nor do I accuse them of poisoning feminism, performing feminism to "get laid" or write them off as pointless because they subscribe to a different flavour of feminism than me.

I can argue and disagree respectfully with other feminists and women . I don't have to belittle, dismiss women or call them names. I refuse to alienate women from feminism. I refuse to do the oppressor's job for them.

That should be they make unfeminist choices.

performing feminism to "get laid
That is not at all what prickly said. She was talking about her younger self. So how are your actions (criticising her for her point of view) squaring with your words (about not belittling feminists)?

She was originally talking about liberal feminists back on pg1 Quentin. I actually don't care that that was one of the means she used. I hope she had a blast. I would not criticise any woman for having sex.

Oh fgs. She wasn't criticising women for having sex. She was saying that a drive to be attractive to men to get sex could affect how younger women express their feminism.
It doesn't seem very controversial to me but then policing how women talk about their sexuality is a massive thing so I guess it's not surprising mentioning "women" and "get laid" together automatically gets people backs up.

Still though, you haven't answered my question about how your actions (criticising prickly) stack up with your words (that you don't criticise feminists).

I think my actions do stack up with my words, "I can argue and disagree respectfully with other feminists and women".

Quentin I'm glad you got something from my post, and you are right of course you are standing in front a veritable Gordian knot and there is no feasible way to untangle it, and that is kind of the whole point. The amount of mental energy you are supposed to expend on it in an effort to solve it takes up a tremendous amount of your personal capacity and potential.

I hadn't always been interested in feminism, but one thing that was abundantly clear to me growing up was this fundemental difference between myself as a man and women I came across, both personally and professionally. I was taught to grow up, become a man and make my mark on the world. Wheras women in the main (I do come across some women like me and some men who are hobbled like women, but this is only anecdotal and the averages seem to be this way at least to me), are never taught to be themselves, they have to be mothers, wives and now lately with the advent of feminism ace career women as well.

This may sound overwhelmingly trite and if so I apologise in advance, but if there is one part of my male privilege I wish I could collectively rip out of us men and share around with everyone else it would be that freedom to work out who you are who you want to be, and from that base of agency and a strong sense of self.

At that point it won't matter where you are on the "nice-but-not-fake" "not-too-assertive-but-not-a-pushover" "bright-but-not-too-clever" "attractive-but-not-slutty" scales as simply put being Quentin is simply good enough, by itself. End of. All the rest is simply fine tuning and calibration.

I've never been able to find the right combination of words to get this simple notion from my head into anybody else's, so maybe that's a sign that I'm entirely off base and everyone should ignore what I'm saying, but Gordian knots are by design unsolvable and the only way you get past them is to cut them in half, let them fall discarded to the dirt, move on and forget about them.

Quentin: Oh fgs. She wasn't criticising women for having sex. She was saying that a drive to be attractive to men to get sex could affect how younger women express their feminism.

Yes this, thank you!

A lot of women moderate their behaviour to accommodate men's expectations/wants/desires.

It's one of the reasons we still need feminism.

The FWR is told moderately regularly by women that it's tone alienates women. FWR is dismissive and rude towards liberal feminism. Criticism is fine but the attitude is patronising and dismissive. These comments are dismissed with bewildered wonder.

The comments are dismissed in exactly the same way men dismiss women.

I just wrote a post then deleted it. Your minds are made up.

So my perspective of this thread mousse is we were having a very interesting debate with lots of viewpoints until you and dione came along, misquoted various people and started laying into prickly for something she didn't say.
It's been hugely derailing and you now claiming that's somehow down to how FWR feels about liberal feminism is kind of proving the point of the OP.

Let me get this right. The prevailing tone of FWR is too critical of other feminists, and it is off putting because it tells people that their feminism is wrong. But the prevailing tone of mousse and Dione's posts, both of whom I have seen repeatedly (mis)characterising the feminists of FWR as also being the "wrong" sort of feminist, because we're too hardline or not nice enough, or transphobic or whatever is...fair comment?

Who's the arbiter of that? Because that seems like a massive double standard to me.

(I namechanged after a thread I was on made the dailies - I've been here quite a while).

Yep- I reckon that just about sums it up, Sophocles. Incidentally, I have never noticed posters being particularly timid about telling feminists where they are in the wrong. I have has several threadsful of robust criticism in the past.........

Liberal feminism is passive, it's wearing a t-shirt or badge and doing sod all.

This is untrue. There are many liberal feminists, who, like me are very active in their feminism. How is making this statement, along with others such as accusing liberal feminism of being poison or liberal feminists as only being so to attract males beneficial to feminism?

The comments are dismissed in exactly the same way men dismiss women

That is a fair comment in relation to some ( by no means all, but some) posters.

They're heterosexual and want to get laid (I honestly think this is a huge part of the man-pleasing strand of liberal feminism among younger feminists). Fear of male violence (because saying "no, that's actually shit behaviour" doesn't garner a polite rebuttal, it can lead to a punch in the face). A hope to get the crumbs from under the table (if we put all our effort into getting men in touch with their emotions instead of repression leading to violence then maybe, just maybe, they'll be a bit nicer to us, and we won't need those women's refuges that got closed down)

I have zero interest in whether my opinions on issues which affect women fall into the radical feminist, liberal feminist or even professional contrarian camp but the comment above seems to me to serve no purpose other to seek validation the poster is right and these lesser feminists are wrong.

SophoclesTheFox

Have you even read my posts!

characterising the feminists of FWR as also being the "wrong" sort of feminist

I have said repeatedly, repeatedly that ever movement needs a vanguard. I have said every movement needs to value all it's followers even if they disagree. Rad fems play a valuable role in pushing forward the debate. I don't always agree but I value the contribution and understand the need for a radical wing.

Can I be any clearer? Should I type it in bold caps?

My issue is with the need by some (Some, not all) rad fems who make comments like:

Liberal feminism is passive, it's wearing a t-shirt or badge and doing sod all

This type of attitude towards the work of some feminists is male in the way it dismisses a valid strand of feminist thought.

QuentinSummers

They're heterosexual and want to get laid (I honestly think this is a huge part of the man-pleasing strand of liberal feminism among younger feminists)

This is the quote from PricklyBall on first reading it is easy to see why it could be construed as dismissive of liberal feminism. PricklyBall came back and clarified what she meant. She did say it, she clarified the point. That happens in discussions it is not a derail.

Sorry for dragging you into this point PricklyBall but QuentinSummers feels the need to keep claiming you didn't say something that was actually said.

So what do you do if you genuinely think, as I do, that some things liberal feminists believe are profoundly damaging to women? I could not, in all conscience, let pro porn or pro prostitution views go unchallenged.

I could not, in all conscience, let pro porn or pro prostitution views go unchallenged

Neither could I. I suppose the difference is I don't care and may not know whether such views are being put forward as liberal feminist views or punters' views or happy hookers' views. I wouldn't change the basis of my argument against them.

Some women who say "I am a feminist" are very offended if they do not receive a validating response along the lines of "yes, of course you are a feminist and not only that, you are as feminist as the most feminist of feminists who ever did something very feministy".

Having the opportunity to give one's opinion on feminism is good and should be respected, but many people seem to feel entitled to additional validation that their opinion about feminism is as helpful to women as any other feminist's opinion. Sometimes it is, but sometimes it isn't. Surely that is just human variation?

Some feminists ARE more feminist than other women who claim to be feminists. Some people ARE richer than other people who claim to be rich. Some people ARE cleverer than other people who claim to be clever, etc.

I'm not getting into who on this thread is more feminist or less feminist, but I'm surprised that some people seem surprised that some feminists really are more feminist and some really are less feminist. (I mean in general, I don't mean posters on this thread).

I'm not getting into who on this thread is more feminist or less feminist, but I'm surprised that some people seem surprised that some feminists really are more feminist and some really are less feminist

But that is a circular argument- each camp thinks their version is "more feminist"

I have read your posts, mousse. I think you've been more balanced on this thread that I've seen in the past. I can't quote you chapter and verse on what you've said to cause this feeling but you've stuck in my head as one of the posters who disavows this part of the site because it's so mean and off-putting, and Not Good Feministing (I could AS and remind myself but that never goes well in my experience). It's not just been this thread.

I really don't want a bunfight, but I was struck by the disconnect. I think it's OK for feminists to disagree. I'd be suspicious if we didn't, and I'm comfortable with it. I'm also comfortable with pointing out where feminism gets so diluted as to be meaningless, as PPs have explained far better than I could.

SophoclesTheFox Thankyou for the honest response but I would appreciate you responding to what I say not what you think I am saying.

This is my post from 11:29 yesterday.

Every political movement needs a spectrum that does not mean one end is right and the other wrong. It also doesn't mean you can't move

Classic Bolshevism promotes the idea of a vanguard. The fighters (literal or metaphorical) who push back the barriers these are essential to keep up momentum. Every movement also needs the followers who align with it. And importantly it needs support within the general populace

All these groups play a vital role non are superior, all need to be valued. If the vanguard pushes away the wider populace support for lacking ideological purity it will find itself alone and irrelevant

BertrandRussell what do you do if you disagree? Well you disagree. What you don't do is point a finger and say "you are not a feminist". All wings of the movement play a role.

vesuvia Some feminists ARE more feminist than other women who claim to be feminists

But feminism needs all the supporters it can get. Rather worryingly not quite a hundred years on from some women being allowed to vote we are still building the movement. Dismissing women for not being good enough feminists is actively damaging the movewith

Also I find FWR worryingly closed minded. I read it because it is important to read ideas you do not always agree with. Reading and engaging with challenging ideas is what keeps you intellectually active. Shutting down debate helps no one least of all yourself. Ideas you disagree with need exploring not dismissing.