Is feminism inherently negative?

[LucyDuke]

No, it isn't. Feminism is "men are not better than women and women are not better than men". Full stop.

Some things that call themselves feminism (a lot of the crap mentioned in the OP) are inherently negative, but that which actually is feminism is not inherently negative.

 

[Mise]

No, it isn't. Feminism is "men are not better than women and women are not better than men". Full stop.

Some things that call themselves feminism (a lot of the crap mentioned in the OP) are inherently negative, but that which actually is feminism is not inherently negative.

Why call it feminism when it preaches equality of both sexes? Surely "equalism" or something would be better, without the connotation that it's all about females. It alienates men.

 

[Yuri2356]

No, it isn't. Feminism is "men are not better than women and women are not better than men". Full stop.

Some things that call themselves feminism (a lot of the crap mentioned in the OP) are inherently negative, but that which actually is feminism is not inherently negative.

If the philosiphy is entirely about equality, why would its very name be gender-biased?

The fact is that the movement began with the specific goal of elevating the status of women. (Which was below that of men at the time, and thus quite justified) Now, with things moving the way they are, the 'feminist' movement should be dissolved in favour of a more general 'humanist' or 'equalist' movement.

 

[LucyDuke]

Why call it feminism when it preaches equality of both sexes? Surely "equalism" or something would be better, without the connotation that it's all about females. It alienates men.

Well, I didn't name it. I suspect the reason is that it was about saying "women are as good as everyone's saying men are". Advocating women, as men were already established. I believe very sincerely that men are not better than women and that women are not better than men. I won't call myself a feminist, though, because it's generated all those extra trappings described in the OP, which are bigoted nonsense.

I just call it "being reasonable".

 

[Mise]

Well, I didn't name it. I suspect the reason is that it was about saying "women are as good as everyone's saying men are". Advocating women, as men were already established. I believe very sincerely that men are not better than women and that women are not better than men. I won't call myself a feminist, though, because it's generated all those extra trappings described in the OP, which are bigoted nonsense.

I just call it "being reasonable".

That's the thing, everyone is reasonable nowadays. Sexism has effectively been reduced to a more insidious form, which in some ways is more dangerous. In my view, it requires something quite different from "feminism", to drive this new, subtle sexism out for good.

 

[plarq]

IF we take a broader view of feminism, i.e. there's a general definition of "Patriarchal Society" means an aristocratic, biased and unequal society; and a general definition of "females" as alienated, oppressed and deprived member/group of a society, be it females, ethnic minority, gays, dissidents, mental illness, I will proudly announce that I'm a feminist who advocate an end of any alienation, self-righteous attitude and positive figure of authoritarianism.

 

[Mise]

I'm a feminist

Fag .

 

[LucyDuke]

That's the thing, everyone is reasonable nowadays. Feminism has effectively been reduced to a more insidious form, which in some ways is more dangerous. In my view, it requires something quite different from "feminism", to drive this new, subtle sexism out for good.

If by "everyone" you mean "most people", then you're totally right. If it truly were everyone, we wouldn't be having this thread.

I wouldn't say "reduced" as well as "redefined", though, but no big deal.

 

[Mise]

If by "everyone" you mean "most people", then you're totally right. If it truly were everyone, we wouldn't be having this thread.

I wouldn't say "reduced" as well as "redefined", though, but no big deal.

Doh... I meant "sexism", rather than "feminism"!

 

[plarq]

The feminist criticism of today is truly reduced to an "alternative truth", which is just too far away from conventional reasoning.

 

[Stylesjl]

I'll answer your question with one word: No

 

[Shaihulud]

Well, despite feminism, its still a "mans" world out there. We can afford a few feminist because they divert the attention from the facts and are funny if you don't take them seriously. Wehn we look at statistic about domestic violence, its usually initiated by the men and finished by them too. Look at the corporate world, its men who rule the roost. Men dominate the political world, we make more money and our words mean so much more above a mere woman. Its no big deal to begrudge a few females to take high position, they will invariably fall, and we will blame it on their sex, so i don't wonder it drives a few of them insane.

 

[Mise]

Well, despite feminism, its still a "mans" world out there. We can afford a few feminist because they divert the attention from the facts and are funny if you don't take them seriously. Wehn we look at statistic about domestic violence, its usually initiated by the men and finished by them too. Look at the corporate world, its men who rule the roost. Men dominate the political world, we make more money and our words mean so much more above a mere woman. Its no big deal to begrudge a few females to take high position, they will invariably fall, and we will blame it on their sex, so i don't wonder it drives a few of them insane.

The problem with that is that you're looking at equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. Women get the same opportunities as men -- in this country, they simply choose not to take them to the same extent as men, on average. I respect a woman's freedom to choose what she does with her life, and believe that feminism (small "f") would too.

 

[aneeshm]

Well, despite feminism, its still a "mans" world out there. We can afford a few feminist because they divert the attention from the facts and are funny if you don't take them seriously. Wehn we look at statistic about domestic violence, its usually initiated by the men and finished by them too. Look at the corporate world, its men who rule the roost. Men dominate the political world, we make more money and our words mean so much more above a mere woman. Its no big deal to begrudge a few females to take high position, they will invariably fall, and we will blame it on their sex, so i don't wonder it drives a few of them insane.

You forget that the mean deviation among men is much higher than among women.

The result of this is that top rung of society will consist overwhelmingly of men, but so will the bottom. It's the way mother nature designed the human race, nothing much we can do about it. Any attempt to "rectify" this will make the situation worse, not better.

 

[Shaihulud]

Do women really have the same opportunity to do as "good as a man"? I admit that i have not spent alot of time out in the business world, but its still a sexist culture really. I don't have the figures and numbers to substantiate anything, but i wager that the average bonuses for males in my company would exceed the female in a given year, its even worse out there i hear.

There are as many men as women, deviation for men should be the same as women, unless we are talking infanticide here. Do families get rid of male infants in favour of females?

 

[aneeshm]

There are as many men as women, deviation for men should be the same as women, unless we are talking infanticide here. Do families get rid of male infants in favour of females?

Mean deviation refers to the distribution of such characteristics such as intelligence. The highest percentiles in intelligence are dominated by men, and so are the lowest ones.

 

[Stylesjl]

Have any of you ever heard of the glass ceiling? That is a pretty big barrier to the advancement of women in buisness

 

[Shaihulud]

Why would men display such a fluctuation in intelligence? and why don't women?

 

[aneeshm]

Why would men display such a fluctuation in intelligence? and why don't women?

It seems that's the way Mother Nature made us. Not much we can do about it.

 

[RubricousMidget]

When we look at statistic about domestic violence, its usually initiated by the men and finished by them too.

Show me the data.
Last time I saw the statistics, both sexes were equally good.
Of course, that is discounting such pages as "End Violence Against Women" and "Men's Liberation Movement".

The main problem with sexism in today's society is not the institutions, but the portrayals. Personally, I'd say the biggest institution of sexism in today's western world is televised advertisements, especially for cosmetics and body-care products. Those aimed at women and those aimed at men both propagate unhealthy stereotypes.
The portrayal of men and women in fiction are also troublesome. 9 out of 10 murderers, rapists, evil bosses and terrorists will be men. 7 out of 10 heroes will also be men. In contrast, 7 out of 10 victims will be female, and when sympathy is to be stirred up for a character, the chances are that character will be female. Also, when a person is to be killed for no good reason at all, for the audience to cheer at or get a kick out of, it will be a man in 95% of the cases.
And that is just scratching the surface.

* All statistics in second paragraph are guesses from experience.