Feminism

[Viktorius_the_Third]

If the good feminists want to differentiate themselves from the bad, they should stop using a female-specific name for their movement.

Completly agreed.

[bobo0100]

I am going to have to disagree with this one, you seem to be stereotyping the movement.

The word Equivalists encumpuses all equal right movements such as the anti-racist movements, the LGBQ movement, the animal rights movement, and the Feminism movement. If a person follows all of the equal rights movements than they are a Equivalists if not than they are a feminist.

In practice although I follow all the equal rights movements I primarily advocate for animal rights, therefor I call myself an animal right activist rather than a Equivalists.

I can see what your saying, people in the movement should not associate with the movement as it now has the negative connotations, people who hear the word feminist and instantly assume the stereotype.

[Volenta]

Exactly my thoughts bobo0100. The word makes clear what group you're fighting for. For equal rights of that group. Bad connotations and bad versions of a movement or ideology is almost inevitable. There are also different types of vegans or stereotypes of vegans, some of which give the word 'vegan' a bad connotation. Doesn't mean you should instantly search for another word; just make clear where you stand for.

[Viktorius_the_Third]

If thats your own concern, and you dont see that FEMINIst is the worse term to choose,
Use: Equivalist for Gender equality (why wouldnt you be for equal rights for all humans btw? o_o)
or Genderquivalists. Or whatever.
But FEMINIst is completly wrong!!! It doesnt promote equal rights but female rights! There is no point in argueing with that.
Quote by wikipedia:
"Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending a state of equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women."
FOR WOMEN! not for both genders! thats the definition of feminism.

[Volenta]

If thats your own concern, and you dont see that FEMINIst is the worse term to choose,
Use: Equivalist for Gender equality (why wouldnt you be for equal rights for all humans btw? o_o)
or Genderquivalists. Or whatever.
But FEMINIst is completly wrong!!! It doesnt promote equal rights but female rights! There is no point in argueing with that.
Quote by wikipedia:
"Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending a state of equal political, economic, cultural, and social rights for women."
FOR WOMEN! not for both genders! thats the definition of feminism.

Maybe because women had—and still have in some countries—less rights than men had? Men already had all the rights the women did not have. If you support a movement or ideology, you express yourself through the eyes of the one being suppressed/fighting for. Don't see anything wrong with that.

[brimstoneSalad]

Use: Equivalist for Gender equality (why wouldnt you be for equal rights for all humans btw? o_o)
or Genderquivalists. Or whatever.

There's a good chance that the system need to be adversarial to some degree.

Men and women are biologically different. See my earlier post in this thread. Because of biological inequality, there is no such thing as objectively equal rights.
What is equal for men and women on certain topics (like child birth and responsibility) are matters of opinion. Men and women see and feel the effects of different kinds of injustices which are rooted in this biological inequality of women carrying the child, and men providing sperm.

What a man thinks satisfied his basic rights, a woman may feel is a violation. What a woman may feel satisfied her basic rights, a man may feel is a violation.

Thus the adversarial nature of the issue, and why one single group can not effectively represent both sides at the same time on matters like these.

[Neptual]

What a man thinks satisfied his basic rights, a woman may feel is a violation. What a woman may feel satisfied her basic rights, a man may feel is a violation.

Thus the adversarial nature of the issue, and why one single group can not effectively represent both sides at the same time on matters like these.

I suppose we need the government to decide for us

[Humane Hominid]

Maybe because women had—and still have in some countries—less rights than men had? Men already had all the rights the women did not have. If you support a movement or ideology, you express yourself through the eyes of the one being suppressed/fighting for. Don't see anything wrong with that.

Not to mention...

...that no one on this thread has actually addressed any actual feminist arguments or ideas, or cited any actual feminist statements or sources, or even really shown any understanding of what actual feminist activists are actually doing with their time and resources.

All the critics here are attacking a straw woman.

[brimstoneSalad]

I suppose we need the government to decide for us

The trouble with that is the government seems to be for sale. Might not be a great solution either.


I don't think there's any easy fix. I just try to stay out of most of it, and encourage the most rational activists from each side. I'm a cheerleader at best.

[Neptual]

I suppose we need the government to decide for us

The trouble with that is the government seems to be for sale. Might not be a great solution either.


I don't think there's any easy fix. I just try to stay out of most of it, and encourage the most rational activists from each side. I'm a cheerleader at best.

I was joking about the my comment btw