Anti-feminist anger, p2

[john]

I always thought of feminism as an active movement, whether political, philosophical or theoretical. Most people (including myself) do very little about it, so why would they consider themselves feminist?

By needle's definition everybody who wants to engage in polite conversation outside of extreme organisations is a feminist. I can't think of anyone i know (apart from my father, who cultivates a narrow mind so he can argue at parties) who doesn't support equality for women. Hardly any of them would call themselves feminists.

oh and the refrain "all sex is rape" is just like your children saying to you "i hate you and i wish you would die." You're not supposed to actually get angry about it.

[needle]

Hardly any of them would call themselves feminists.

Well, they should :P

Or at least not deny it..

I dunno..that's like saying you're not a liberal, or a republican, or whatever unless you actively campaign on behalf of your party, or support it?

[Guest Raidne]

You realize that if this argument was valid it would apply equally to your own position?

No, I know upon casual examination, it probably seems like it does, but it's only analogous one way. On the one hand, we have people saying:

(1) Using "men" to describe all human beings both excludes women and categorizes them as the Other, and as a lesser variant on the default human mode, which is man.

And other the other hand we have:

(2) Using "feminist" to describe all people who are in favor of gender equality is undesirable because "feminism" has become associating with crazy bra-burning, castrating Womyn who think all men are racists.

In the first example, we object to the term because it subsumes our group identity into that of another group, and in the second example, you object to the term because you feel that a minority has overtaken the group identity.

We can object that it's ridiculous that you can argue that a minority of members has ruined a term for you when you're fine with a term that marginalizes half of the people in it, but you can't make that argument the other way. Can you see that?

ETA: To John: My Philosophical Issues in Feminism professor added a second part to the definition of feminist the first being (1) those who believe in equality for women and (2) do not think we have achieved it yet.

I think this would be a much more valid reason for TK to deny feminism, as she doesn't identify with (2), incidentally.

[TheKassi]

Well, they should :P

Or at least not deny it..

I dunno..that's like saying you're not a liberal, or a republican, or whatever unless you actively campaign on behalf of your party, or support it?

No Needle. To use your analogy, your argument is akin to arguing: “Because Republicans are pro freedom, you better call yourself a Republican, otherwise I am going to think you hate freedom.” or “All Americans who love freedom but refuse to call themselves Bushies are cowards or lack conviction.”

You are like the 2004 Karl Rove of feminists.

The other side simply points out that you can love freedom while refusing to identify with several political organizations, and then walks away.

[needle]

No Needle. To use your analogy, your argument is akin to arguing: “Because Republicans are pro freedom, you better call yourself a Republican, otherwise I am going to think you hate freedom.” or “All Americans who love freedom but refuse to call themselves Bushies are cowards or lack conviction.”

You are like the 2004 Karl Rove of feminists.

The other side simply points out that you can love freedom while refusing to identify with several political organizations, and then walks away.

Who is Karl Rove?

(I'm not American. I don't follow your politics. Is this supposed to be a good or a bad thing?)

That anology only works if 'Bushie' has a dictionary definition of 'freedom lover', which as far as I know, it doesn't.

[Kalbear]

Raidne, while that might be what the argument means to you about rape and sex with men, there are plenty of people out there who view it pretty much spot on with what Sariel said. I've met them at rallies and the like. They're not pleasant folks.

So yes, I agree that that argument is more cogent than what Sariel put forward, but I'll also state that that argument (that all sex with men is rape and all men are rapists if they've ever had heterosex) is present in feminist circles and supported, even.

Needle, it seems very stupid to label someone as not supporting feminist views if they don't like the label feminist or the connotations of it. That they'd rather self-define as someone who supports more egalitarian issues should be a warning sign. I've also heard there's a strong group who would rather label people who are supporting feminism but not women (or not actively campaigning) as 'pro-feminist' to distinguish; the argument being that a man cannot by definition be a feminist.

[john]

ETA: To John: My Philosophical Issues in Feminism professor added a second part to the definition of feminist the first being (1) those who believe in equality for women and (2) do not think we have achieved it yet.

What about people who believe in equality for women but who don't think about it much when not stating their beliefs, are comfortable with the status quo and think society is at least on the right track to equality.

That would encompass most people, I would think. I tend to think of feminism as more of a live issue than that, but i still wouldn't call myself a feminist.

[TheKassi]

That anology only works if 'Bushie' has a dictionary definition of 'freedom lover', which as far as I know, it doesn't.

Ahh but it does work. You see America is a Republic. The dictionary has a definition of republican that reads: "fitting or appropriate for the citizen of a republic" Thus it is inappropriate for any America to refuse to self identify themselves as a republican no?

No. Political organizations are not defined by their dictionary definition and opening a dictionary to see if you identify with a particular political organization is just weird.

As for your question, Karl Rove is a chubby gremlin that helped a chimp win national elections by telling people that everyone who didn't vote for the chimp hated America, wanted our troops to die, and so forth.

[needle]

dble post

[needle]

Needle, it seems very stupid to label someone as not supporting feminist views if they don't like the label feminist or the connotations of it.

Huh? What else would you take from someone saying that they are not a feminist but that they don't support feminist views? I may well be stupid, but I'm not getting the logic here. Ok, maybe I'm being a little deliberately obtuse, but really, logically your statement makes no sense.

That they'd rather self-define as someone who supports more egalitarian issues should be a warning sign. I've also heard there's a strong group who would rather label people who are supporting feminism but not women (or not actively campaigning) as 'pro-feminist' to distinguish; the argument being that a man cannot by definition be a feminist.

I had no idea that men couldn't be feminists by definition. I'll have to tell Zak he has to stop.

I know I'm coming over as a complete feminazi, but I really think people need to get over the issues they have with the word. If you support equality for women, whether you actively campaign for it or not ( not that I think that that is particularly valid - I don't need to join a club and have a freaking badge to be a feminist and neither does anyone else) I don't get why you would have a problem in admitting that you are a feminist. Saying you are not a feminist strongly suggests you don't support the feminist goal of equality for women, and unless I'm telepathic, that's what I'll think when someone says they are not a feminist.

[Guest Raidne]

Why, I think Kassi has me on ignore! In that case, :fencing: :smoking: I'm just going to tell myself that I'm right, since my point about the labeling/linguistic analogy has gone unrefuted. Hey, that's how it works in college debate.

Kal - You and I had this discussion at length a few years ago - it was a good discussion, and I think I agreed with the point you were making then. But I think you also agreed with me, eventually, that that's not what MacKinnon and Dworkin were saying. Certainly I agree that there are feminists who have taken it much further than that (otherwise, why would there be separatists?), but also people often conflate the opinions to the point where my Criminal Law professor simply laughed and turned the page when we got to section on MacKinnon in the rape chapter of my criminal law book.

[Alexia]

Saying you are not a feminist strongly suggests you don't support the feminist goal of equality for women, and unless I'm telepathic, that's what I'll think when someone says they are not a feminist.

I don't see how the two ideas that [equality defines feminism] and that [women who want to exterminate men, except a few held in slavery for breeding purposes, can be legitimately called feminist] can coexist. Matter of fact, they seem to expressly contradict each other.

[john]

Or at least not deny it..

Fair point. I suppose most people wouldn't actively deny they're feminists even if they weren't aware they fitted into the definition before. :P

So yes, I agree that that argument is more cogent than what Sariel put forward, but I'll also state that that argument (that all sex with men is rape and all men are rapists if they've ever had heterosex) is present in feminist circles and supported, even.

I've always found that argument fairly easy to accept in context. If you, as a man, accept feminist rationale on ideological grounds (rather than on political grounds), then you already accept you're part of an oppressive hierarchy, you've actively participated in demeaning women and enjoyed the fruits of that labour. It's not so hard to move from that to the idea that sex can't really be totally consensual.

As a white, western male, you have to come to terms with all your many crimes. It's not like you don't get to carry on enjoying the privilege in the mean time.

The above is partly tongue in cheek, but it's still true.

[Guest Raidne]

I think most feminists feel a little tongue in cheek about all that too. Or at least I know I do. :)

[TheKassi]

Ok. I don't think of feminism as a political organisation. It fits non of the criteria for that. It's a theory, an ideology, a movement

A movement... seeking power in the governmental or public affairs, or otherwise campaigns for things? Unless the campaigning you yourself brought up involves siege works that is the dictionary definition of political.

Which is the problem with attempting to narrow down extremely complex concepts into simplistic one or two line sentences, and then arguing that any deviation from the simplistic definition is irrelevant or unimportant. Complex concepts tend to be, coincidentally perhaps, complex.

[Guest Raidne]

Except that, of course, TK is actually for all the political goals of feminism, so if it were just a political movement, she'd be one. Ha.

[needle]

A movement... seeking power in the governmental or public affairs, or otherwise campaigns for things? Unless the campaigning you yourself brought up involves siege works that is the dictionary definition of political.

Which is the problem with attempting to narrow down extremely complex concepts into simplistic one or two line sentences, and then arguing that any deviation from the simplistic definition is irrelevant or unimportant. Complex concepts tend to be, coincidentally perhaps, complex.

Khassi, I think we could sit here half the day arguing if the sky is blue or not. I'm finding it fairly amusing but it's surely dull reading for everyone else so perhaps best to drop it. Go for Raidne, she's a far better opponent on the snark than me. In toher words, can't be arsed to trot out the meaning of political organisation for you.

I don't see how the two ideas that [equality defines feminism] and that [women who want to exterminate men, except a few held in slavery for breeding purposes, can be legitimately called feminist] can coexist. Matter of fact, they seem to expressly contradict each other.

See this is where I like the board. I've spent half an hour googling for theories that call for the extermination of men to see if they are legitimatelty feminist or not, and I haven't found much apart from Valerie Solan's Scumtract. We can maybe disregard that one as coming from someone not entirely sane, who later said it was satire. Can you point me in the direction of any others? Not snarky, genuinely interested if you have links to hand.

[CelticKnight]

The only thing this thread has accomplished is reinforce the beliefs on each side.

I also find it funny how in the the first thread, when people were saying that they had nothing against feminism, only the extreme form of it, feminists retorted by stating that other than in old books and teaching in classrooms they don't really exist. Yet, not only is this thread is rife with them, but they're now acknowledging their existence, and some even embracing it.

Interesting.

[needle]

The only thing this thread has accomplished is reinforce the beliefs on each side.

I also find it funny how in the the first thread, when people were saying that they had nothing against feminism, only the extreme form of it, feminists retorted by stating that other than in old books and teaching in classrooms they don't really exist. Yet, not only is this thread is rife with them, but they're now acknowledging their existence, and some even embracing it.

Interesting.

Examples? I have't seen anyone calling for mass male castration, or separation from males, or anything I would regard as extreme. I'm curious as to who you think the extreme feminists are? I'd say John fer sure, he's acknowledged the male sexual privilege after all..

And you make it sound like there's this plague of icky extremist women! embracing their own existence! how dare they! :P

[TheKassi]

In toher words, can't be arsed to trot out the meaning of political organisation for you.

An group of people united by common political ideology or agenda, or a group that that involves itself in the political process.

Please do not try to argue that Feminism isn't political. Political is in the dictionary definition you have been thumping since back when.