Failings of feminism - real or not?

[Elder Sister]

I am probably going to regret stepping into this thread, but...

I think you will find very few people (men or women) disagree about overarching "feminists goals": equal pay, equal opportunity, etc. The issues become contentious when they are presented in an overly adversarial manner and when discussing proposed remedies. One can disagree whether companies should be required to provide paid paternity leave equal to maternity leave without being a dirty sexist pig. This notion escapes many, unfortunately.

You're making the assumption that most people recognize the disparity in equal pay, opportunity and etc. That's one of the things I find most troubling: There are a whole host of people who deny the existence of these issues, and believe that they were 'fixed' many years ago.

[Sci-2]

That people don't want to identify as feminist is a victory of the patriarchy. It seems little different than not wanting to be a "militant gay" or an "angry minority".

Of course, how those terms are used will vary, and I can point out times I think someone is overstating their case when facing prejudice. But that doesn't paint the entirety of the movement.

This demand that feminists as a whole need to rethink their brand is a diversionary tactic. However, I can accept it isn't a wholly conscious one. I rationally recognize feminism as being right via my rational brain, but I can still feel a knee jerk reaction to some feminist arguments.

A healthier respect for logic and statistics would likely be helpful. And maybe some people need to let go of SFF covers as masturbatory aids. ;-)

[straits]

Your quote is so depressing. Actually the original OP is extremely depressing. We're not talking about dumb, uneducated people making these statements.

And then I wonder what I'm being obtuse and backward about. Is there something I'm this closed minded about and don't see?

The only problem is that you did not point out why any of what you quoted was wrong. You just articulated your distaste.

I think the original message tried to state that the perceived form of feminism today is pushing for women functioning exactly the same way men do, in a modern society which has been built with men's rules in mind. Which in turn rejects femininity that the poster seems to prefer.

[Lyanna Stark]

As an older woman, I have lived through bra burning, the failure of the ERA, the Roe decision, the failure of sex as being a "suspect class" for the purposes of Equal Protection Clause analysis by the US Supreme Court (women are quasi suspect), Title VII and Title IX. . . . You get the idea. Thankfully, but incrementally, the climate is becoming better than it was when I was a child. Better is not perfect, but it is hopeful. However, the struggle for the power of choice continues.

I am extremely grateful that younger women are willing to continue the conversation with regard to decision making and the real power of their choices. It is a mental, emotional, and intellectual exercise, not a soley a physical one. Sadly, it is a focus upon the physical differences between the sexes that seems to divert the discourse away from the real issue: choice.

This is a really good point, I think. Younger feminists have a lot to be thankful for and to respect the older generations for too, and it worries me that there often seems to be such a "disconnect" between the near history (what happened in the 60s, 70s and 80s) and where we are now. Without the knowledge of what our mothers and grandmothers fought for and the fights they won, it's hard to get a proper perspective of where we are and where we want to go.

I think the original message tried to state that the perceived form of feminism today is pushing for women functioning exactly the same way men do, in a modern society which has been built with men's rules in mind. Which in turn rejects femininity that the poster seems to prefer.

Well, that is it. "Perceived". Where does this come from, that this form of feminism is in any way prevalent or mainstream? (I mean, there are always crackpotters, but like in most diciplines, those are mainly disregarded and marginalised.)

"Functioning exactly the same way men do" is also a bit of difficult concept. What does that entail, exactly? The way I interpret it is "biological function" and as dear old Simone pointed out above, trying to somehow ignore physical differences is helping exactly nobody, and was established by her in 1949 as a not useful approach. Hence it seems that it's rather pointless to regurgitate stuff that was debunked soundly over 60 years ago. I haven't read every feminist work out there by a long shot. Not even all the major ones, but I have so far not come across a mainstream feminist thinker who is of the opinion that men and women are "functioning in the exact same way".

[Elder Sister]

The only problem is that you did not point out why any of what you quoted was wrong. You just articulated your distaste.

I think the original message tried to state that the perceived form of feminism today is pushing for women functioning exactly the same way men do, in a modern society which has been built with men's rules in mind. Which in turn rejects femininity that the poster seems to prefer.

Straits, forgive me if I'm wrong about this, but it seems that we (you and several of us) have had this discussion before. I would hope that if you really want to know why the feminist movement is necessary, you will be willing to peruse the multiple topics on this subject in this very forum.

This topic is about the failings of the movement itself, why it's still being questioned as necessary, and what one can do about it; not why it existed in the first place.

[straits]

Alright then, if modern feminism pushes a significant number of women away from identifying as feminist, is it a 'failing of the movement', or a 'victory of patriarchy'?

[Sci-2]

I think the original message tried to state that the perceived form of feminism today is pushing for women functioning exactly the same way men do, in a modern society which has been built with men's rules in mind.

I think this comes from not being well read on the varieties of feminism, thinking a part is a whole. Of course, this failing is not unique to any group, you see liberals saying things like "most cops are corrupt" or "most Republicans are racist".

Alright then, if modern feminism pushes a significant number of women away from identifying as feminist, is it a 'failing of the movement', or a 'victory of patriarchy'?

I suppose there is the question of how do you make real political gains - how much do you soften your tone or explain yourself?

I think recent conversations have shown that if a person is unwilling to acquiesce to reason, and at least try to read up on logical fallacies, there is little hope in making headway. There are also the classic derailing tactics.

How do you even get past these first road blocks seems to be a pertinent question for any group.

[Tempra]

You're making the assumption that most people recognize the disparity in equal pay, opportunity and etc. That's one of the things I find most troubling: There are a whole host of people who deny the existence of these issues, and believe that they were 'fixed' many years ago.

True, but I think most people who disagree about the existence or extent of the pay gap or whether women are currently provided equal opportunity still agree that equal pay/opportunity is a good thing for society. But, yes, many disagree about the extent or existence of the disparity. Not trying to deny that.

I must ask, however, are you saying one cannot question the extent of the pay gap? Or whether some of the underlying reasons for the pay gap need correcting and, if so, to what extent they need to be corrected through legislative mandate?

[Lyanna Stark]

Alright then, if modern feminism pushes a significant number of women away from identifying as feminist, is it a 'failing of the movement', or a 'victory of patriarchy'?

Well, that's my point. Is it feminism pushing people away, or is it something else, and in that case, what is it?

Some food for thought.

I am married and have kept my surname. So has my mother. Never been called a sexist for it, but it caused some issues in the UK with some administrative staff who needed to ask me twice about it. They were not judgemental however, although a nice older lady made it so I could choose to be known as Lyanna S or Mrs T, whichever I preferred (although it confused the hell out of me to answer the phone and having people ask for Mrs T and I'd think they were after my MiL).

My husband never question my decision either. In fact, as he is a progressive sort, he has been toying with the idea of taking my surname instead.

[Balefont]

I don't think it's modern feminism that pushes woman away from identifying as a feminist. I think it's lack of proper education on the subject as well as villification in the media (movies, television, etc.). Neither of which would I lay at the feet of "failing of the movement" or a "victory of the patriarchy" but instead an abundance of general ignorance on socially important subject matter.

[Tempra]

I agree with Tempra. It is often how the discussion evolves that many have issues with, not the idea that men and women are equal and should be treated as such.

Edit: Oops. I somehow thought you said disagree. I need coffee.

[Myshkin]

I think the problem is that feminism, like most other modes of belief, has come to be defined in public opinion by the actions/beliefs of a radical fringe. I think a significant percentage of people agree with what would traditionally be called feminist ideals, yet those people would never describe themselves as feminists because they have no idea what feminism actually is.

[Seventh Pup]

I think the "problems" with feminism are the problems that all groups have, which are...

1. Some unreasonable people identify with the group making extreme statements and taking extreme positions.

2. That even base line members of the group are trying to change the status quo, this makes people uncomfortable.

3. That people who do not identify with the group, but like the status quo either willfully for subconsciously take the most extreme views and view them as baseline, or that they willfully or subconsciously invent view that they think would be the next logical step for a group, " the slippery slope" if you will.

These problems exist for any group. Environmentalists, Christians, Homosexuals, Farmers, etc. However feminism gets quite a lot of this, because half the population is women, and the society has a long history of not treating that half the best.

An example of 1. Is a woman who will not let her daughter play with dolls ever, even though her daughter likes dolls free of any couching. 2. Would be a woman who lets her daughter play with dolls, but never wants to buy a Bratz doll because she thinks they send a harmful message about femininity. 3. Would be a person who thinks all feminists would never let their daughter play with dolls, would make their son play with dolls, and would never let their daughter see the color pink.

[Elder Sister]

True, but I think most people who disagree about the existence or extent of the pay gap or whether women are currently provided equal opportunity still agree that equal pay/opportunity is a good thing for society. But, yes, many disagree about the extent or existence of the disparity. Not trying to deny that.

I must ask, however, are you saying one cannot question the extent of the pay gap? Or whether some of the underlying reasons for the pay gap need correcting and, if so, to what extent they need to be corrected through legislative mandate?

No, I absolutely do not agree that one cannot question the extent of the pay gap, or why it exists, or how to correct it. I think, honestly, though, part of why it's so easy to ignore and brush aside its existence is the argument that the differential in the .82 to 1.00 is the choices women make to raise children, etc.

Well, that's my point. Is it feminism pushing people away, or is it something else, and in that case, what is it?

I think it's a couple of things:

• There is a branch of the media that actively works to vilify, poke fun at, and belittle the movement.
  
• You have a whole generation or three of women who would rather get breast implants and watch "Jersey Shore" than pause for 5 minutes and ponder what it was like to be female 50 years ago or even 35 years ago. I'm not saying implants or Jersey Shore are wrong, btw.
  
• Many people are just not aware of what the problems are, what being a feminist means, and how it effects them personally. And shame on the feminist movement (this means me, as well) for not doing a better job educating, speaking out, and exemplifying this.
  

I don't think it's modern feminism that pushes woman away from identifying as a feminist. I think it's lack of proper education on the subject as well as villification in the media (movies, television, etc.). Neither of which would I lay at the feet of "failing of the movement" or a "victory of the patriarchy" but instead an abundance of general ignorance on socially important subject matter.

Yup, yup, yup. Genius! (and just so happens to agree with my thinking. :D)

[SerMixalot]

"Men and women aren't equals in everything and that is just a fact of nature. Refusing to accept this fact (not that any of you fit into this category) often does more harm than good, when it comes to both males and females."

This statement always confuses me. I cannot be the only person on the face of the earth who has known women who were phsyically as strong, and as capable of lugging a machine gun, fire hose, etc., as a man. Of course, most women cannot do these things, but if they can, why shouldn't they be allowed to fill the role of whatever position we're talking about?

It is indisputable that men and women are different-can we agree on that? Women can have babies, men cannot. Therefore, that difference must be accounted for in society. I dont believe anyone is fighting against the concept that a qualified person should have equal opportunity. That is why I support women in combat, if they can satisfy equal stanards or adjusted standards that do not impact the performance of the mission. However, it is ludicrous to state that the differences do not exist nor impact the execution of bringing equality. Usng the combat example, the presence of women in combat situations will create issues that need to be resolved. These issues, insomuch as they arise from the males perceptions are both reasonable and unreasonable, both sexist and non-sexist. Education-which is best done non confrontationally-you get more flies with honey then vinegar, is the best solution to resolving these conflicts. Modern people are generally for fairness. It does noone any good to vilify a group that opposes an ideal when their opposition derives from an honorable position, even if that honorable position is incorrect.

[straits]

I think recent conversations have shown that if a person is unwilling to acquiesce to reason, and at least try to read up on logical fallacies, there is little hope in making headway. There are also the classic derailing tactics.

How do you even get past these first road blocks seems to be a pertinent question for any group.

Good link :)

I don't think it's modern feminism that pushes woman away from identifying as a feminist. I think it's lack of proper education on the subject as well as villification in the media (movies, television, etc.). Neither of which would I lay at the feet of "failing of the movement" or a "victory of the patriarchy" but instead an abundance of general ignorance on socially important subject matter.

I think this is true. But this also points out that feminism and its goals (and that of similar movements) do not have instinctively obvious arguments at a glance (provoking the knee-jerk reactions Sci mentioned), and would indeed need education in order to understand what they're about. I'm trying to say that it has become an area of expertise which can't be fully explained by common human sentiment. I don't see what would motivate uninterested observers to give it more thought.

[Lyanna Stark]

I think the problem is that feminism, like most other modes of belief, has come to be defined in public opinion by the actions/beliefs of a radical fringe. I think a significant percentage of people agree with what would traditionally be called feminist ideals, yet those people would never describe themselves as feminists because they have no idea what feminism actually is.

My issue with this is that I don't even know who the radical fringe is. And I feel I *should* know if they are so clearly defining the discource.

This seems to be some sort of media construction, like the falsely attributed Andrea Dworkin and Catherine MacKinnon quote "All sex is rape" or "All men are rapists", which is wonderfully debunked by Snopes here.

So who are these radical fringe feminists who define the debate? Where do they live? What do they do? Who listens to them?

Modern people are generally for fairness. It does noone any good to vilify a group that opposes an ideal when their opposition derives from an honorable position, even if that honorable position is incorrect.

Well, that's a bold statement, and what do youn mean by "honorable position" in this context?

[Thlayli]

When the topic of feminism comes up, the conversation is fraught with dire peril. DIRE! The manfolk are either getting their backs up (fearing that they are about to be called a rapist-in-waiting) or afraid someone is coming to take their privilege-begotten gains. The best a man can hope for is the acceptance as an ally, thus bettering his chance of heavy petting after drinks. Some of the women are also on guard because of fear they are not perceived as feminist enough. Feminist eat their own.

[Lyanna Stark]

When the topic of feminism comes up, the conversation is fraught with dire peril. DIRE! The manfolk are either getting their backs up (fearing that they are about to be called a rapist-in-waiting) or afraid someone is coming to take their privilege-begotten gains. The best a man can hope for is the acceptance as an ally, thus bettering his chance of heavy petting after drinks. Some of the women are also on guard because of fear they are not perceived as feminist enough. Feminist eat their own.

I really hope you are joking, but if you are, it's not funny. At all.

[straits]

It is indisputable that men and women are different-can we agree on that? Women can have babies, men cannot. Therefore, that difference must be accounted for in society. I dont believe anyone is fighting against the concept that a qualified person should have equal opportunity. That is why I support women in combat, if they can satisfy equal stanards or adjusted standards that do not impact the performance of the mission. However, it is ludicrous to state that the differences do not exist nor impact the execution of bringing equality. Usng the combat example, the presence of women in combat situations will create issues that need to be resolved. These issues, insomuch as they arise from the males perceptions are both reasonable and unreasonable, both sexist and non-sexist. Education-which is best done non confrontationally-you get more flies with honey then vinegar, is the best solution to resolving these conflicts. Modern people are generally for fairness. It does noone any good to vilify a group that opposes an ideal when their opposition derives from an honorable position, even if that honorable position is incorrect.

Maybe a distinction between gender and sex would be good in a school curriculum in this case. I guess the problem is that gender, and any social perception revolving around it, is something intangible and is thus harder to explain, or harder to see as important as part of basic education.

I personally didn't know, or care, about the difference between gender and sex until I started lurking on these forums 3 years ago. If I did not, I would still be seeing transsexuals as people who, for some unfathomable reason, want to have invasive surgery. It never crossed my spectrum of interest or interaction.