I’m a cis male and I believe in the importance of feminism, but I hesitate to call myself a feminist because it seems like there is a presumption of understanding women’s experiences as if I was part of the Me Too movement. In some binary sense given how hateful and shitty men can be I’m absolutely a feminist, but I wouldn’t declare myself to be one. What is your standpoint?
If Feminism is equality between genders, then yes, I am a feminist.
But if Feminism is unconditional trust towards women, then no, I’m not a feminist.
In my experience people who call themselves feminists often put women above men, and will deny any criticism towards them because they’re women, and women never do anything bad.
I have never met a feminist that does these things despite being a feminist and in feminist circles for decades.
Was going to say essentially this. It can really feel like the most outspoken feminists have a ‘women good, men bad’ mentality (of course many men are equally deranged).
The injustice towards women is absolutely greater, but look at health and happiness metrics and it looks like men are much worse off, and those two points are very much intertwined, a lot of cause and effect both ways (just my opinion and how I’ve made sense of everything). I think there’s probably no such thing as womens problems or mens problems. Only human problems that bounce around and affect everyone.
To your point, yes absolutely these issues affect us all, because we’re all connected as humans. But you might want to reconsider how you phrase that. This has big “I don’t see color” energy.
Both men and women absolutely have unique and specific issues that need recognition if we are to meaningfully address them.
True we certainly have lots of issues to recognise and address, but we’ve been trying for decades and not getting all that far. You don’t think it’s at all worth considering these issues in a broader sense? How some men’s treatment of women is influenced by women’s treatment towards men? Or what women can do to help those men be better. It’s not like one person’s actions is anyone else’s responsibility, but surely it could be an area of focus?
Well feminism is from Latin “femina” - a woman, so it is a fight for women’s rights, and not for gender equality. Men also face lots of expectations that can be called toxic, like supressing their emotions, being the one responsible to bring the beacon home, going at war etc. These things are out of scope for feminism.
If you have to pull out an etymology argument to justify a political position, you’re wrong by default. Because you’re blatantly ignoring the actual movement & extracting whatever meaning you want out of that word.
Feminism fights against the patriarch, which in modern terms include both traditional restrictions placed on women and men. So the fight against patriarchal expectations placed on men, among them toxic masculinity, are absolutely part of feminism as a political movement today.
Etymology doesn’t exist separately from the meaning of the word. If something is called “womanism” (the literal translation from Latin), that means it actually does have to do with women.
Yes, I have heard a lot of feminists talk about also fighting against patriarchal expectations placed on men, but again the opposite of patriarch is matriarch, not gender equality. So women are still considered victims and men are considered aggressors - or victims of other men, for that matter. It’s still in essence a fight of women against men. If it wasn’t, it would be called something else. For example, humanism, because the word “human” makes no gender distinction.
My interpretation of it equals to same standing. Both in duties as well as in wages.
A woman should get the same wage regardless of if they get a child or not.
Same Job? Same output? Same wage!