Feminism contradicts an equalist society: discuss

[Equalist1]

I’ve been watching a lot of threads lately and I have come to the conclusion that; feminism in its earliest form was a beacon of light in an unjust era. Fighting against clear inequality between genders. My question is, as the gaps reduce into non existence should we begin to describe ourselves as equalist as opposed to feminists.

I think this is a really important point to discuss as evidence suggest that the youths of the day I.e 0-30 years olds there are virtually zero inequalities between men and women, and, the variables that are unequal are because one side chooses to be different.

Thoughts?

I’ve been enlightened re the error of my thinking by the OP, so;

We have equality but we need to seek equality but not equality for women cos things that are examples of female oppression aren’t very important.

Do I get graded at level 1?

Eleventy points to Offred! Well done, your cognitive dissonance didn't show at all.

Eleventy points? Is that better or worse than grade 1? Maybe it is better but worse but better but not really that important cos I’m a woman...

Is it just me who finds it really creepy when people post and then put

Thoughts?

at the end of it?

Wow, I hope that was a very enjoyable hour for the OP. Anyway, I’m off to campaign about dog Shit now. My eyes have been truly opened.

Of all the things @Elendon!

It’s a tad creepy it reminds me of the 🧐 emoji.

I did enjoy the ‘Hello! I have made up some words. You are all stupid! Goodbye!’ though, it’s a new way of making the same tired point!

Elendon
Is it just me who finds it really creepy when people post and then put

Thoughts?
:Discuss.

Feels like a command from someone who labours under the delusion that they are dominant.

I found that sentence "The confounder here is that men are physically superior to women" seriously creepy. 'Superior': who uses that in a physical sense, it implies some sort of assumed social meaning.

I also don't like that implicit assumption that greater physical strength (as a class) means the natural right to use it. Neither does anyone else, ever, when it occurs with women looking after children, for instance. But in men living with women, that's just natural innit. Women know your place. FROTTFSOF.

It also suggests that if women were as strong as men, as many men would die from domestic violence as women.,......,

I think the OP is most likely a school boy, men’s rights activist from outside the UK. Very stilted way of writing. Very dated turns of phrase. No knowledge at all of any basic aspects of women’s rights.

In general, does anyone else ever worry more broadly about the mental health stability of some of our visitors? I would hate to push someone over an edge by being too robust

Poor menz mustn't be challenged? We all know how fragile their cute little egos are.

The point of feminism is not for feminism to rate highly in opinion polls. We’re not a company, we don’t need to work on our brand image.

In addition, I am very much unconvinced that there are any feminists who are fighty just for the sake of being fighty. Sure, some people care most about certain areas, and some about others, but as there are many areas that need attention and improvement, it’s probably good that each gives her attention to the issues she cares most about.

I think your logic that the gender gap is chosen by women makes sense. But if you frame that logic another way I’m sure if you go back in history the same was said about women and voting. Some women didn’t want the vote. After years and years and years of being told you’re less I can understand if you started to believe it- but It doesn’t make it right. That’s why it’s so important to have people spearheading these campaigns. You see it time and time again people not fleeing DV because they think on some level they’re undeserving- from basically being brainwashed. The gender gap is the same.

Oh look, another MRA sealion wanting feminists to centre men. Nope, not soing that. When men no longer outnumber women as sexual offenders 50:1, come back and we'll talk.

‘Irrelevant issues’? It’s hard to see what could be more relevant and important in a discussion of feminism/equalism than the rates of violent crime committed by men against women, children, and other men.

OP I know you've 'gone' but I think the idea that we're fast reaching equality is a bit of an illusion really.

Many men (and some women to be fair) say to me feminism isnt necessary anymore, it should be about equality, not trying to oppress men 'like it is now', but I always refer them back to the idea 'when you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression.'

Their view of equality is a very narrow minded one. I think some women get swept along in this idea that we dont need feminism anymore, particularly because many of us have a lot of privilege in a different way, be it race, income, being able bodied, living in a country with welfare/sanitation/clean water and so have more opportunities than many. Just because we, this very privileged group, have it better than we used to, doesnt mean every woman around the world does.

Your word choice is an insult. I do not think women choose to be a victim of FGM, I do not think women choose to be victims of dv and rape, I do not think women choose to go into sex work because they think its an admirable career. Just because life is better for you doesn't mean its equal for all.

Better also doesnt mean good enough; if it did, we'd never make any progress in anything.

You work in education so lets use an educational analogy; SEND pupils - is provision better than it used to be, hell yeah. Is it the best it can be? Definitely not. Why not? Because the system doesnt allow the resources for it to be. So whats the answer? Change the system. Not just say ah well, its good enough.

If you say that feminism is no longer needed, or needs to be recentred around equality for all, you're really saying feminism needs to shift focus away from the rights of women and girls...shifting to where? Ah. To the rights of men, granted women and men, but now we're including men. Making sure they get equality. The real question is, do they want equality or do they want to preserve their privilege?

Yes, eventually we will move towards true liberation and equality, but we're a long way off that yet and even if you think your privilege has put you on an equal footing to men because none of those 'irrelevant issues' apply to you, think about how women were paying the tampon tax for years, how women paid more for razors because they are pink not grey, how women are socialised into believing we need to shave our body hair in the first place. Watch I am not an easy man, its lightweight and has its problems, but its also very good at highlighting everyday sexism that oppresses women and we've just been conditioned to ignore it. That is not 'nearing' equality and you're a fool if you think it is.

I’m not trying to understate what still has to be done. Just that the main pro of feminism is allegedly equality for all.

This is where you make your mistake by buying into what men want Feminism to be.

Feminism is the political movement for the liberation of women.
It is not an equality movement because we know what our foremothers knew.
"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread." Anatole France pseudonym for Jacques Anatole Thibault (1844-1924)

I didn't make it past the first page before the flames shot out the side of my face and I had to reply.
I am sad the OP deserted us just as they were beginning to understand the error of their ways. And before they could bathe in the flames.

the flames shot out the side of my face

I would like to have seen that.

Evolution of the midnight misogynist!

Your question has been answered and your premise rejected. The horse is already dead and yet you keep beating the poor thing...

OP, you are hilarious. Do direct your students to this thread, I think they'll enjoy it!

And you have never heard of a case where a woman was the best candidate but the board thought she might get pregnant and not be able to devote the time etc. so it was preferable to choose a man?

No, never happened of course.

Well said.