"Feminism is equality"

[MrGHardy]

This is a response by a woman to a man talking about feminism:

"Your understanding is wrong. Where does everyone get this idea that feminism is some kind of for-all happy umbrella? It's for the equality of women vis-a-vis men. And men, Mr. Read, don't get to decide what feminism is."

I have come across this so often recently, where feminism is portrayed as "for equality so it is also for men" etc. and this Twitter user used a good phrase: "some kind of for-all happy umbrella".

I think it's a deliberate misrepresentation of feminism, in order to distract the discussion away from the issues, away from women, and to paint women in a bad light as some sort of female supremacists if they disagree with the idea, feminism is equality for all i.e. also for men. The idea "feminism is for women does not imply it is not for equality" seems also hard for people to understand and is easily misrepresented.

How do you deal with this? If you constantly have to first convince people that feminism is not for men, not a blanket "for-all happy umbrella", it gets very frustrating and distracts from the issue at hand (and instead leads to a debate about what feminism is, and what its goals are and who it is for). Additionally, as a man you are quickly accused of mansplaining (especially by women who for some reason believe that feminism is also for men) or at least asked for a definition which is a) difficult to do for me b) at least in my case necessarily leads to accusations of mansplaining.

It was part of the backlash against women's rights and Feminism.
While the corporate interests were turning women's liberation into a marketing tool the op ed writers were mansplaining that Feminism should be about equality for everyone, expressing the 5th rule of misogyny: Women and Feminism must be useful to men or they are worthless.
My response is simply that Feminism is the political movement for the liberation of women. People who prioritize men are MRAs, not feminists. Odd that people get them confused, innit.

There is a brilliant Magdalen Burns video on this, I will try and find it.

I just answer stuff like this with ‘Feminism is advocacy for women and girls worldwide. Egalitarianism is equality for all’

m.youtube.com/watch?v=bnrOLhx6L3c

Oh that idiot!

I love Magdalen so much!

You have to dispute the 'feminism is about equality' mantra every time, because - for one - thing - it allows men to say things like 'You've got equal pay (yeah!), what is there for you to complain about?'

The argument that feminism is about some vague notion of “equality” is part of what’s gotten us into this liberal feminist nightmare, and given strength to MRAs (and the TRAs who insist on re-defining feminism). MRAs will argue that if feminism is about “equality”, they should be campaigning also for men’s issues, and instead of MRAs dealing with actual male issues they bash feminists for being hypocrites. Which, if your feminism is all about “equality”, then technically you are being a hypocrite for not focusing on men...
No. No to all this nonsense.
Feminism is for females. Females of whatever background. But only females. It’s about women’s rights, and female-specific issues. It is not exclusionary to organize around issues specific to one group, especially if they make up half the population and have distinct needs.
I agree with Germaine Greer when she says that feminists don’t actually want “equality” in the sense that few women are clamoring for sanitation workers to have a 50% female workforce, or for nursing to become 50% male. Equality of opportunity, being treated with equal human dignity, yes. But feminism to me is looking at the unique features that affect the female sex, and making sure our laws and society address female needs.
If females don’t advocate for ourselves, who else is going to?

Heresy, this!

I saw some fb messages under a Pool (I know...) article today about how much nicer liberal feminists are because they want to include everyone and how nasty radical feminists are because they hate men (blah, blah) and then, of course, a load of woke men patting the lovely little lady on the head. It was so depressing.

The argument that feminism is about some vague notion of “equality” is part of what’s gotten us into this liberal feminist nightmare, and given strength to MRAs (and the TRAs who insist on re-defining feminism). MRAs will argue that if feminism is about “equality”, they should be campaigning also for men’s issues, and instead of MRAs dealing with actual male issues they bash feminists for being hypocrites. Which, if your feminism is all about “equality”, then technically you are being a hypocrite for not focusing on men...

YY. Exactly.

I saw some fb messages under a Pool (I know...) article today about how much nicer liberal feminists are because they want to include everyone and how nasty radical feminists are because they hate men (blah, blah) and then, of course, a load of woke men patting the lovely little lady on the head. It was so depressing.

Men approving of your feminism is a sure fire way of knowing that what you're doing is NOT feminism!

Feminism as I understand it has little to do with equality. It's a liberation movement. It's a political movement to liberate women from the slavery of Patriarchy. No one sensible asks for equality with their oppressors, they demand to overthrow them. I think this was easier to understand when the movement was called "Women's Liberation"

I looked up the definition of Feminism the other day. Can someone tell me in what way women, in the UK, are in anyway shape or form "Subjugated"?

Thanks

What definition did you read that included the term ‘subjugated’, Shooz?

Shooz is not posting in good faith. He's had his arse handed to him elsewhere for being a creepy dick and has come here to teach the wimmin a lesson I fear.

He's had his arse handed to him elsewhere for being a creepy dick

I'm afraid that's only happened in your head, mate.

I'm sure Shooz can google

I can, and I can't find the definition' so my bad. For the record, I'm a feminist. Probably a male Terf but a feminist nonetheless.

Why can’t women talk about women’s issues without having to prove why we care about them? They affect us. We have the statistics. What is it to you if we focus on trying to fix them?

I genuinely believe that MRAs have a point when they say that males are more likely to be homeless and die of suicide. I don’t think they have to prove they are being “subjugated” in order to talk about them. I just don’t think it’s for feminism to sort out - but the males themselves as they will understand the issues better due to personal experiences. I would never begrudge them the rights to speak about and organize around such issues and I would ally with sensible causes that tackle these problems!

Why can’t females be offered the same courtesy to focus on issues that disproportionately affect them as every other political group (eg sexual violence, deaths from domestic violence) without having to continually “prove their subjugation”?

I'm afraid that's only happened in your head, mate

Take your face out for a shit fella.

I don't want to be men's equal: that's not ambitious enough.

Take your face out for a shit fella

Still never happened, geezer

Next he will be asking how black people are subjugated. Oh wait, no he won't. It's just women who are doubted and questioned.

And men can't be feminists. As you're proving.

TCG,

I believe in equality. I'm a Fem whether you like it or not.

The whole point of the OP is that

Equality is not feminism