Might help also to describe what you think feminism is, since it’s one of those terms that is overloaded.
I once had a physical therapist tell me she wasn’t a feminist because she thought women couldn’t be as physically capable as men when serving as soldiers, and seemed to believe feminism requires treating women exactly like men.
I told her I was a feminist because I believe in equal rights for men and women, an idea she did not seem so opposed to.
You must log in or register to comment.
There’s so many flavors of feminism, and some self described feminists have been pretty wack, I’m just gonna be an egalitarian.
Then according to commentators in this post you’re a “sexist pig”
The ratio says otherwise
I am a feminist.
Feminism means all genders should be treated equal, but that does not mean men should also get paid menstrual leaves at their job. Equal rights, yes. Everyone should be treated fairly.
Defining it as paid menstrual leave is kind of the problem. Hear me out.
Women should be able to take paid leaves from work to deal with menstrual problems, but it shouldn’t stop there. All people should be able to take leave from work when they need it.
So, if it is redefined as paid leave, then it equalizes the field.
If feminism means equality, yes. If it means women are better than men, no. If it means women have been oppressed so now it is their turn, no.
What is it means men get systematically treated better so we need to put our finger on the scale?
I don’t understand your statement
My politics are death to america and death to israel. Free Palestine and free the planet from US empire and centuries of European colonial domination.
Feminists have not done much materially on that front lets be honest.
Throwback to big name feminist Judith Butler on October 13 2023:
spoiler
In fact, I do condemn without qualification the violence committed by Hamas. This was a terrifying and revolting massacre. That was my primary reaction, and it endures.
…
There are those who do use the history of Israeli violence in the region to exonerate Hamas, but they use a corrupt form of moral reasoning to accomplish that goal. Let’s be clear, Israeli violence against Palestinians is overwhelming: relentless bombing, the killing of people of every age in their homes and on the streets, torture in their prisons, techniques of starvation in Gaza and the dispossession of homes. And this violence, in its many forms, is waged against a people who are subject to apartheid rules, colonial rule and statelessness. When, however, the Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee issues a statement claiming that ‘the apartheid regime is the only one to blame’ for the deadly attacks by Hamas on Israeli targets, it makes an error. It is wrong to apportion responsibility in that way, and nothing should exonerate Hamas from responsibility for the hideous killings they have perpetrated.
Judith was not the only big name feminist to hold such views following the magnificent al Aqsa Flood Operation.
I would say that the web of NED/USAID NGO’s that represent the face of feminism today has been a very effective tool of empire. I dont want women CEOs and women drone pilots and women iof soldiers and women politicians in puppet governments. I am a woman who wants the end of colonial occupation and superexploitation.
You have a very developed viewpoint! Thank you for sharing it!
🫡
I believe that I am, but I’m told that my definition is wrong.
For reference, my definition is:
Anybody who believes in equal rights for women.
that’s about what my definition is too, what do you think other people think feminism means, why are you told your definition is wrong?
FYI you can’t be a feminist if you pay for the SA and murder of other women.
women aren’t cows. cows aren’t women. and artificial insemination isn’t SA, it’s a veterinary procedure.
Well cows wouldn’t call themselves “women” no, but I’m sure they do have some gender expression that is apart from just their sex. I could have said females, but I don’t really like using that word.
These cows cannot consent to having someone shove a fist inside them, it is very much SA. I’m sure colonizers had the same mentality as you when they were SA Women of colour and indigenous women.
doors can’t consent to have your keys jammed in them either. the very concept of consent can’t be applied to cows or doors.
Cows are sentient, you comparing them to objects is exactly the kind of shit feminism fights against.
If a human had the same intelligence as a cow do you think it would be okay to SA them?
If a human had the same intelligence as a cow
I haven’t said anything about intelligence, or suggested sa is ever ok.
sentience has nothing to do with consent.
Sentience has to do with among many other things, the ability to suffer. These cows suffer because they are SA, have their kids stolen from them and have their lives cut short only to end in some place worse than hell.
So no sentience does have something to do with consent because only with sentience does consent matter. I don’t need to ask a tree consent to cut it down because it does not feel anything. I do need to ask other individuals for consent because they can suffer.
consent and sentience are totally unrelated concepts. your response only continues to muddy the waters.
comparing indigenous people to animals is gross
Thinking just because someone has a different shaped body than you and isn’t as intelligent gives someone the right to SA them is gross.
The problem is you being so brainwashed to think it’s okay to abuse others that you forget indigenous people are animals. We all are.
indigenous people are animals.
kindly, leave me alone
That you think other animals are below you is the problem here. Don’t blame me for your human supremacy.
I haven’t made any such statements. please leave me alone
Lots of good comments here pointing out problems with feminism, but one that I think hasn’t been mentioned enough in this thread that’s also directly relevant to the OP is the harmful idea that “if you believe in gender equality, then you’re a feminist by definition”.
While the term “feminist” does signify a person who, at least ostensibly, is in favor of equal rights among genders, using that term also, necessarily, implies belief in the core dogma that is inseparable from the term itself (patriarchy theory, etc.). This creates a false dichotomy in which people feel that in order to support equal rights they must also buy into feminist dogma, and that’s not at all the case.
Luckily, though, feminism doesn’t have a monopoly on gender equality, and it’s important to let people know that fact, both because of how incredibly misleading “feminism just means gender equality” is and because there are more useful, more egalitarian frameworks through which to view the push for equality.
