Feminism and Gender Equality

[Tsunami]

And also equality of opportunity. Which is an important part of the equation. Because no one is saying men and women should be EXACTLY the same as individual people. It's about treating women equally to men, and ensuring that they have the same opportunities as men. There should be nothing that a man can pursue that a woman can't also pursue.

I agree there should be equality of opportunity. However I think sometimes there is too much emphasis on the negatives of inequality than on the positives.

For example I think that it is a good think that men and women don't compete against each other in certain sports. I say certain sports because I firmly believe that there are some sports women can easily compete with men in, not all but certainly some! Which I don't think it's sexist to say, as you only need to look at some sports to see the difference in competitive times.

That being said, if there was a woman who was faster than Usain Bolt in his prime but a committee ruled she couldn't compete with men if she asked to just because she is a female. Well then I would expect people to be up in arms!

No, because you shouldn't be hitting anyone.

My job is my job.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

A wise man, whom I quote above (and indeed, he is wise) once said people would seek to hijack things "for the wrong reasons".

Ironically - that has been proven by the comments of Law Abiding Heretic and a few others.

I don't dislike anyone on this forum, expect for Brandon (who is a naughty boy), but I would say - respectfully - that people need to learn the difference between 'debate' and 'argument'.

In a debate you enter into the discussing with an open mind, willing to defend your own beliefs but also to change them.

In an argument you cover your ears and scream at each other.

There is a lot to be learned from this discussion - for example, Misandry is a very useful opinion changing word, Fedora Tipping is....something, and that sometimes, miscommunication and the way in which extreme minotorities in social movements act can taint the image of the mine mynas a whole.

Feminists: Good.
Extreme Femenists: Bad.

I see nothing wrong with feminism, but like all extremism, feminism when taken to an extreme damages the wider, more liberating movement.

By the same token, I would also say a few things.

Don't think of it as hijacking. Even if you don't like someone's tactics or someone's beliefs, look to understand them. Try to understand what motivates them. It's very easy to dismiss people as "extremists" or "radicals" and use words like "hijacking," but by and large the people who you would put into those camps are not setting out to be malicious. There are underlying social issues that motivate them, and those issues are millennia of sexism and patriarchy. It's very easy for a man to go "don't hate men, not all men are bad!" It's much harder for a man to also say "but, I understand where you are coming from, and we still have a lot of work to do to fix the underlying social issues that make you feel that way."

The very fact that this conversation is about extremes is a problem. It obscures the actual issues that need to be addressed and the real conversations we should be having. The more men get wrapped up in "but someone was mean to me!!!1!1!" the easier it is for them to justify attitudes like "feminism is bad."

I'm going to put you on the spot here, Nor'baal! Based on your change in perception (which is cool, by the way - most people would not be as open to changing as you are in this thread), are you comfortable with calling yourself a feminist now?

 

[Nor'baal]

@Tsunami would you say you are a.......hitman?

*muffled giggling*

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I agree there should be equality of opportunity. However I think sometimes there is too much emphasis on the negatives of inequality than on the positives.

For example I think that it is a good think that men and women don't compete against each other in certain sports. I say certain sports because I firmly believe that there are some sports women can easily compete with men in, not all but certainly some! Which I don't think it's sexist to say, as you only need to look at some sports to see the difference in competitive times.

That being said, if there was a woman who was faster than Usain Bolt in his prime but a committee ruled she couldn't compete with men if she asked to just because she is a female. Well then I would expect people to be up in arms!

That last paragraph is telling. What it tells me is that you actually agree, but you're wrapped up in so many non-issues that you don't actually see that you agree.

I don't know of anyone who would say that a 5 foot 1 woman who is 110 pounds should play in the NFL. But if there was a woman who could actually compete in the NFL, why shouldn't she have that opportunity?

There's a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of result. Very rarely will see you someone argue for equality of result. 99% of the time, it's about equality of opportunity.

 

[Nor'baal]

Ninja'ed by Brandon.
Metagaming.

And in response to your question:

It would very much depend on who was asking the question. As you're asking it I would say yes. However, if the Chairperson of the University Femenist Society was asking me, I wouldn't dare say yes - as last time I did she told me I could be a Femenist as I was a white male.

But - as most sane normal people don't tend to react to what I say with shouts and screaming, I would happily day to people, "I am a Femenist, I believe in gender equality.".

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Ninja'ed by Brandon.
Metagaming.

And in response to your question:

It would very much depend on who was asking the question. As you're asking it I would say yes. However, if the Chairperson of the University Femenist Society was asking me, I wouldn't dare say yes - as last time I did she told me I could be a Femenist as I was a white male.

But - as most sane normal people don't tend to react to what I say with shouts and screaming, I would happily day to people, "I am a Femenist, I believe in gender equality.".

 

[Nor'baal]

A large part of me thinks you've had that GIF in waiting since late 2012.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

A large part of me thinks you've had that GIF in waiting since late 2012.

You might very well think that.

I couldn't possibly comment.

 

[Tsunami]

That last paragraph is telling. What it tells me is that you actually agree, but you're wrapped up in so many non-issues that you don't actually see that you agree.

I don't know of anyone who would say that a 5 foot 1 woman who is 110 pounds should play in the NFL. But if there was a woman who could actually compete in the NFL, why shouldn't she have that opportunity?

There's a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of result. Very rarely will see you someone argue for equality of result. 99% of the time, it's about equality of opportunity.

No I do agree if a woman CAN compete on an even footing on a sporting event, that she should be allowed to. I'm more than aware of my ability to accept it.

What I'm saying is that people almost expect it to happen otherwise it's not equal. I mean someone could change sport entirely, say male and female sport will be merged across the board, then you will have those women who were good enough to compete in some sports no longer being picked for the Olympic/National teams.

Anyone looking at the difference in times of a lot of sports will see that, as much as I'd love to see a woman win the gold medal at the olympics for the 100m freestyle. The difference in their top times in that event just too huge.

Male 100m Free World Record: 46.91
Female 100m Free World Record: 52.07

As sad as it is, that human beings are built the way they are. There are somethings that should be accepted until evolution produces someone who can compete.

I'm not arguing equal opportunity, just the reality of what some seem to want. Some people would see that female world record holder race against men regardless, even though she is not going to be competitive as a lover of sport, that to me is a terrifying thing.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

You're arguing against an argument that doesn't really exist in any meaningful way. There may be some people who say they should be merged or whatever, but not the vast majority of people.

 

[Tsunami]

Exactly, because in a sporting aspect. That divide is a good thing. My argument is that some divides are still required, that as much as the word equality is thrown around, men are men and women are women both are inherently different.

Life's a b*tch. We will just have to wait for the plateau, then women to catch up to that point.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

Exactly, because in a sporting aspect. That divide is a good thing. My argument is that some divides are still required, that as much as the word equality is thrown around, men are men and women are women both are inherently different.

Life's a b*tch. We will just have to wait for the plateau, then women to catch up to that point.

So, my point goes back to this then:

The very fact that this conversation is about extremes is a problem. It obscures the actual issues that need to be addressed and the real conversations we should be having. The more men get wrapped up in "but someone was mean to me!!!1!1!" the easier it is for them to justify attitudes like "feminism is bad."

Don't get caught up in arguments about things that aren't at issue. It obscures the point.

 

[Cainhurst Crow]

I don't like how condescending a lot of the discussions in mainstream identity issues have become. These arguments that woman can't succeed if given the same resources and opportunities as men, and so they should be given more of them to compete. Or the thought that woman are somehow weaker then men when it comes to emotional burden or stress, and so we need to create spaces for them to not be exposed to anything uncomfortable or distressing. The later is more about safe spaces in general, but a lot of those discussions tend to assume minorities and woman are the ones who need them, and frankly I don't like that message. Woman are just as strong as men, and men vary in strength from person to person. But woman get treated as this homogeneous group who are all equal in strength and fortitude to one another, and it seems more and more that you can never talk about an individual person of a gender, without someone taking it to mean all genders. Similar with how every lgbt fictional depiction or every fictional female in todays media seems required to be used as a mouthpiece for how good and deserving of respect all members of said group are. You can't have an incompetent female character, or a sadistic or weak lgbt character, just to name some character types off the top of my head, without the internet throwing a shitstorm about how insulting it is to all woman and how disrespectful it is to all woman. Yet straight-males can have any character trait and nobody thinks it represents every straight-male. You'd be call a fool if you made the argument that a straight-male character like Gaston somehow represented all straight-males eveywhere. But have a character like Bayonetta and oh boy, you're a sexist cause you must obviously think all woman are just for sex and only talk about sex. It's really ridiculous to me, how the people who champion equality and fight negative behavior, turn everything into a stereotype against the people they're fighting to defend.

 

[Brandon Rhea]

For the record (and this is all I'm saying since I'm about to log off for awhile), that last sentence in your post was also a generalization.

 

[Green Ranger]

Also keep in mind that third wave feminism is also more about a broader perspective of fighting for equality - so marriage equality, fair representation of minorities etc. - Along with some of the ongoing fights from second and even first wave feminism - such as equal representation an pay equality for women.

The misandry movement was not born out of third wave feminism - it's an extremist belief that sprang out of the earliest notions of the feminist movement, and directly tying it to the third wave movement or trying to claim it is a direct result of the third wave is incorrect.

 

[Raydo]

I mean, Rey is the main character in The Force Awakens. Obviously we have reached the pinnacle of human togetherness...

 

[Brandon Rhea]

I mean, Rey is the main character in The Force Awakens. Obviously we have reached the pinnacle of human togetherness...

Rey is a major step in the right direction. But let's also look at the main cast of The Force Awakens:

• Rey
• Finn
• Poe
• Han
• Chewie
• Leia
• Kylo
• Hux
• Phasma
• Snoke
• Luke

3 women, 8 men.

Rey is extremely important and I don't want to diminish that, but over 70% of the cast was still male. It gets slightly better when you look at background players, such as Jess Pava, but the background is still largely dominated by men. White men to boot.

Rogue One is even worse in gender representation. Of the main actors who have been announced, only one (Felicity Jones) is a woman. She's also the lead of the movie, so again it's great that Star Wars movies have female leads now, as well as how racially diverse the male cast members are. But it's still unbalanced from a gender perspective.

For the record, I say this knowing full well that your post might have been sarcastic. But I thought that this was a reply worth making no matter what. Because there are legitimately people who would hold the belief "Rey was the main character, therefore there's no inequality." Which is just as foolish as "Obama is president, racism is over."

 

[Officiant]

Also keep in mind that third wave feminism is also more about a broader perspective of fighting for equality - so marriage equality, fair representation of minorities etc. - Along with some of the ongoing fights from second and even first wave feminism - such as equal representation an pay equality for women.

The misandry movement was not born out of third wave feminism - it's an extremist belief that sprang out of the earliest notions of the feminist movement, and directly tying it to the third wave movement or trying to claim it is a direct result of the third wave is incorrect.

You are most certainly correct in this. Most people think the loud, unfortunate strain of misandry that some would say dominates a lot of modern feminist thought is a product of the third-wave. In reality it emerged with the second stage of second-wave feminism in the early 1970s with authors like Kate Millet, Andrea Dworkin and Robin Morgan and was colluded with fights against both the "patriarchy" and pornography. Very few of these early authors ever claimed that "all men hate/oppress all men" but they did have some very, very inflammatory and radical ideas about men like Valerie Solanas and her work the SCUM Manifesto or Germaine Greer's The Female Eunuch which infamously said that "women have no idea how much men hate them" (though I would consider this a throw-a-way line in the book). As the fight against pornography continued through the mid 1970s and the early 1980s many of the feminist works produced in this period were (fashionably) radical and proposed a great many ideas about men, portraying men monolithically and attaching them as a collective, implicitly or explicitly to crimes against women. Feminism, like the rest of Academia became consumed with the idea of Deconstruction and breaking down society into it's smallest bits and looking at the pieces through a particular lens.

In the 1980s there was a backlash against Feminism but it would come back in the late 1980s when the culture wars in the United States exploded. Feminism attached itself to, and was influenced by the liberal left. As the 1990s rolled around, second wave feminists emerged back on the scene like Gloria Steinem and Andrea Dworkin emerged back into the new mass media culture. Due to mass media and the ongoing culture wars, various versions of feminism and schools of feminist thought emerged. Like it had in the 1970s over issues of sex and pornography, "Third Wave Feminism" as coined by Rebecca Walker, split with various reactions both positive and negative. Reactions against what were seen as the excesses of the then current feminist movement and its ties with the 90s PC culture came from within and without feminism and the declination between "Equity" and "Gender" feminism first emerged, encouraged by the works of Christina Hoff Somers, Camille Paglia, and even Betty Freidan. It is very, very important to note that Third Wave Feminism had no coherent ideology or leaders and was intensely factious like the wider culture wars and debates that were part of the 90s.

Feminism, once again after a very productive and tumultuous decade, laid low from the last years of the Clinton Presidency to just within the last 6 or 7 years when fights for same-sex marriage, racial equality, and other civil rights and social justice issues came around again. This type of feminism is defined by the media and the internet and has produced no great intellectual works but yet is defined by ideas set forth in the Third Wave and could be seen as a Third Wave 2.0 or a new theatre of the culture wars after there was no clear winner. This wave of feminism is also linked to "PC" culture and has produced some very (in my opinion) terrifying intellectual strains. It is interesting to note however that because of the internet, a very large backlash against Feminism is occurring while it is seemingly having a very bright day in the sun insofar as the media is concerned. Women who self identify as feminists have sunk to all time lows as the word becomes associated with who ever chooses to wear it and like many other social movements in this modern era, once again lacks leaders, a coherent ideology and books to turn to.

 

[Green Ranger]

Personally, I dismiss the notion of the feminist movement of the last 10 years or so being the 'fourth wave' (or the third wave 2.0 as you put it), hence why I haven't referenced it (this isnb't jsut addressed at you, I think it was mentioned earlier)- it's too soon to really designate it as such, and it doesn't really differ much from the third wave of the 90's except in terms of media used to communicate ideas and arguments. For me, it's more about third wave finding new means to reach audiences.

The general thrust of the so-called fourth wave seems to be identified more closely with SJWs and misandrists rather than the more credible and moderate side of the feminism movement, which is...problematic for the larger movement in general. That a lot of people associate feminism with SJWs and...well, the tumblr crowd, is a serious image problem.

And don't even get me started on Germaine Greer. Her position on a several feminist issues over history have been questionable at best, but her attitude towards trans people is woeful.

 

[Officiant]

Personally, I dismiss the notion of the feminist movement of the last 10 years or so being the 'fourth wave' (or the third wave 2.0 as you put it), hence why I haven't referenced it (this isnb't jsut addressed at you, I think it was mentioned earlier)- it's too soon to really designate it as such, and it doesn't really differ much from the third wave of the 90's except in terms of media used to communicate ideas and arguments. For me, it's more about third wave finding new means to reach audiences.

The general thrust of the so-called fourth wave seems to be identified more closely with SJWs and misandrists rather than the more credible and moderate side of the feminism movement, which is...problematic for the larger movement in general. That a lot of people associate feminism with SJWs and...well, the tumblr crowd, is a serious image problem.

And don't even get me started on Germaine Greer. Her position on a several feminist issues over history have been questionable at best, but her attitude towards trans people is woeful.

Indeed, Tumblr and the Internet and some Feminists in the media killed Feminism for me and I still have many incredibly, incredibly mixed feelings on it. Though I read a great quote the other day, on Tumblr no less, "These people are not Feminist, they are extremists" which I like.

I just want to say I love Germaine Greer, though I have no trouble critiquing some of her points. She's the first person to admit that she puts ideas out there and people don't have to agree with her, she would just like that they listen, which I think is quite admirable.