Is feminism the end for the west?

[warpus]

Feminists don't have the best PR.. Most of the feminists or feminist literature I tend to come across are of the "more rights for women, who gives a crap about men" variety.

Mind you I don't actively try to seek any of this material out, it just ends up in my lap for one reason or another. And I understand that feminism as a whole is not an organized movement and as such can't have a central PR department or whatever.. But yeah.. when I think "feminism", I don't exactly recoil, but I don't have a very positive image of the movement either.

As for what the movement is actually about, some feminists say that it's about equality.. but most (from my experience anyway) admit that it is mainly to get women more rights.. This is perhaps where a lot of the negative views of feminism come from - a lot of men feel that there isn't an equivalent movement around that would push for men's rights.. Heck, even the term "men's rights" has a negative connotation to it. Maybe what we need is a gender-neutral movement that strives for equal rights for both genders instead.

 

[Tee Kay]

I for one like men and women equally

 

[Formaldehyde]

I'm not sure why you are debating with me on this point. Can you deny that the word 'feminist' now, for many people, does not just mean equal rights for women? That when many people hear the word feminist they recoil? I have said if you define feminist in terms of real equality then I'm sure when you ask most people they will be happy to identify themselves as such. But if you do not define the term first then the identification with the word will be much lower. It is not me that is defining 'feminist' negatively, it is the popular perception of many people that self-identified feminists are not exactly the most pleasant people.

Because I really don't think the fanatics are all that important.

A female friend of mine once came to visit me when I was living in Manhattan. She and another female who lived in the city wanted to attend a feminist rally next to the Plaza Hotel. She suggested that I go have a beer while they did so. I stated I was interested in what would be said, so I would like to tag along. She was still reluctant but finally agreed that I could come if I wished to do so.

There were a couple hundred women present and perhaps a dozen or so males. Ten or so of the women were extremely rude and obnoxious. They glared at the men present making it clear they didn't want us to even be there while making numerous misandrous comments. All of the speakers and most of the other women seemed more embarrassed by them than anything else. But the atmosphere of the event was that anybody could make whatever comments they wished.

None of the speakers made me uncomfortable in the least with what they stated, as well as the vast majority of women present. I received a number of sympathetic looks from other women who knew I must be on their side if I was even there.

I guess it is inevitable that the feminist movement would attract these women. But I don't think it is really representative at all.

Heck, even the term "men's rights" has a negative connotation to it.

Is it any wonder? It reminds me of the Christians who claim they are being discriminated against in the US, or the whites who think they deserve affirmative action programs.

 

[BvBPL]

Feminism is not a unitary concept.

Consequently, making broad statements about what feminism is or is not and what feminists do or do not believe is prone to inherent failure.

Case in point:

In the simplest terms possible: feminists that promote equality in the family, workplace and in society are good. 'Feminists' who spend their time ranting against perfectly normal sexual desires are not so good.

Take three thinkers:

Alpha says that women should be entitled to the same legal rights and protections as men.

Beta says that the doggy-style sexual position in a heterosexual relationship is inherently demeaning to the receiving woman and is akin to rape.

Gamma says that women should rejoice in their sexual differences with men and should embrace femininity in dress and behavior.

All three are real feminist ideas. If you're talking about feminism as a unitary concept you need to consider all three thinkers. If you broadly condemn feminism as an unwelcome intrusion into bedroom behavior because you disagree with Beta then you also condemn Alpha and Gamma at the same time despite the fact that you may agree with Alpha.

Similarly, if you broadly praise feminism as a concept because of Alpha then you implicitly also support the thoughts of Beta and Gamma.

To use an analogy, consider how absurd it would be to say that German is an inherently hateful language because it gave rise to Mein Kampf and then to have another party turn around and say that German is inherently a beautiful language because it gave rise to Rilke. It doesn't make sense. Simply because Hitler and Rilke both wrote in German it doesn't mean it makes sense to draw broad judgments about German as a language from these two men.

Stop talking about feminism. Feminism isn't a topic because it is too broad.

Instead, talk about the works and words of feminists. If you, like CivNoobie, think that an idea or a thought or a pattern that is supported by a feminist thinker foretells the "end of the West" then talk about that idea. If you think that a feminist idea is great and wonderful then talk about that idea.

But stop talking about feminism like it is some monolithic thing.

In fact, stop talking about feminism at all. If you want to post about a feminist theme then you would be greatly served by talking about the thing itself and not even mention feminism because as soon as you use that word you'll get some of the posters thinking about Alpha, some about Beta, and some about Gamma.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Very interestng post ! IMO the self called feminist ARE trying to fill the so called "gap" between man and women - And IMO They are doing it wrong....

Plain and simple discrimination of women is over !!! in the so called "west" so are we dumb ? do we need to be teached a lesson ?? I leave that question up to You

I have separated these two quotes for a reason: I want you to read both parts of your post and see that they contradict one another. There cannot be both a gap attempting to be fixed, and also the end of discrimination. Discrimination is far more than just a strictly legal "Jim Crow" kind of law which explicitly names its target. It is a structure of laws and society which disadvantage one group compared to another.

And finally, I don't think really think women care whether a man thinks they're struggling against male-dominated society "wrong" or not. The whole point is to escape the domination of men.

 

[CavLancer]

I went for "Emancipation" for the happiness benefits it promised.

 

[Rashiminos]

Your relation of my assertion that misandrists = Santa Claus (or the Easter Bunny, your pick) to hypocrisy implied to me that you believed I was being a misandrist. Which I suppose is possible, but I don't think a self-loathing misandrist is what you have in mind when you bandy the term about.

The hypocrisy remark was directed at

There is something especially vile about casually and flippantly dismissing the problems of half the human race.

specifically... Since you have so flippantly dismissed problems regarding half of the human race, you have proclaimed yourself to be vile. I see no reason to dispute your self-assessment.

Of course it is. Misandry as a social phenomenon is a matter of personal faith. There's no actual evidence of systemic oppression of men (as opposed to the quasi-inherent oppression of women, which is a thing that you know, exists) so you choose to believe in it.

Unless of course we are discussing the great tragedy of male inability to break into the vaunted, high-paying fields of nursing and childcare.

If we adhered to Cheezy's rather stringent definition, we'd be discussing divorce proceedings, especially child custody. We could also rekindle the infant male circumcision argument.

 

[Angst]

Feminism is not a unitary concept.

Consequently, making broad statements about what feminism is or is not and what feminists do or do not believe is prone to inherent failure.

Case in point:



Take three thinkers:

Alpha says that women should be entitled to the same legal rights and protections as men.

Beta says that the doggy-style sexual position in a heterosexual relationship is inherently demeaning to the receiving woman and is akin to rape.

Gamma says that women should rejoice in their sexual differences with men and should embrace femininity in dress and behavior.

All three are real feminist ideas. If you're talking about feminism as a unitary concept you need to consider all three thinkers. If you broadly condemn feminism as an unwelcome intrusion into bedroom behavior because you disagree with Beta then you also condemn Alpha and Gamma at the same time despite the fact that you may agree with Alpha.

Similarly, if you broadly praise feminism as a concept because of Alpha then you implicitly also support the thoughts of Beta and Gamma.

To use an analogy, consider how absurd it would be to say that German is an inherently hateful language because it gave rise to Mein Kampf and then to have another party turn around and say that German is inherently a beautiful language because it gave rise to Rilke. It doesn't make sense. Simply because Hitler and Rilke both wrote in German it doesn't mean it makes sense to draw broad judgments about German as a language from these two men.

Stop talking about feminism. Feminism isn't a topic because it is too broad.

Instead, talk about the works and words of feminists. If you, like CivNoobie, think that an idea or a thought or a pattern that is supported by a feminist thinker foretells the "end of the West" then talk about that idea. If you think that a feminist idea is great and wonderful then talk about that idea.

But stop talking about feminism like it is some monolithic thing.

In fact, stop talking about feminism at all. If you want to post about a feminist theme then you would be greatly served by talking about the thing itself and not even mention feminism because as soon as you use that word you'll get some of the posters thinking about Alpha, some about Beta, and some about Gamma.

I actually think of feminism as more of a humanist analytical method, which coincides greatly with your post, (Ie the "these claims are feminist" is, in my optics, "these claims are feminist analysis", if we categorize it as an analytical method) but I'm not sure how to feel about it.

Thinking of it as an analythical method that could support different political and cultural ideologies and demean others, though, makes perfectly sense. (One feminist analysis leads to a conclusion that one kind of society or behavior is bad according to an ideology or agenda.)

Do I make sense? Am I reading you correctly?

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

zephyronormative, euruphobic

I can't find either of those words in any dictionary anywhere!

 

[Borachio]

Ahh! I figured it out.

Zephyr (which is in the dictionary) is the West wind. Euros the East.

Zephyronormative is a portmanteau word coined by Gori the Grey, meaning, I'm guessing, the automatic preference for Western "culture". As opposed to "euruphobic" meaning, almost literally, fear of the East. Or the Yellow Peril, if you like.

Also, Normative.

It's quite clever. But what else would one expect?

You found the "boreanoric dichotomy" OK, then?

 

[Gori the Grey]

Zephyronormative is a portmanteau word coined by Gori the Grey, meaning, I'm guessing, the automatic preference for Western "culture". As opposed to "euruphobic" meaning, almost literally, fear of the East. Or the Yellow Peril, if you like.

If only it were that simple, a preference for Western over Eastern culture. Oh, no, the critique goes much deeper than that, an attack at binarocentric thinking per se. Binaries, as is commonly known, are inherently oppressive. One term in a binary is always privileged relative to the other, and that privilege is invariably mapped onto the gender dyad in an intrinsically subjugating fashion (doggie-style, we might say). The true feminist is therefore committed to subverting all binaries. West and East are small fry; it will not suffice until west and east (note case (here and in OP)) have been eliminated. (You'll notice that it is always men asking for directions in such terminology.) Humankind will not be truly free until both terms are replaced by "gaiant," (the direction of movement over a sphere being ultimately inconsequential since origin and telos are one) and until movement in a deliberately chosen direction is replaced by anemoietic meandering.

@plutonian: your phallogocentric biases will only be reinforced if you keep using dic(sic)tionaries to find the meanings of words.

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

I aim to please.

 

[sophie]

Feminists don't have the best PR.. Most of the feminists or feminist literature I tend to come across are of the "more rights for women, who gives a crap about men" variety.

Mind you I don't actively try to seek any of this material out, it just ends up in my lap for one reason or another. And I understand that feminism as a whole is not an organized movement and as such can't have a central PR department or whatever.. But yeah.. when I think "feminism", I don't exactly recoil, but I don't have a very positive image of the movement either.

This characterization is more strawman than reality. I mentioned this before, but opinions like the one you mention above, the "man-hater feminist", largely died out in the 90s.

In case you're interested...just some introductory-level stuff to get you started

 

[Gori the Grey]

I aim to please.

See, that's the kind of puerile, penile, philodirectional thinking that just reinforces masculinist pseudobinaries like west/east. What with it's inevitable concomitant, "You aim too, please." Just male latrine humor, except that such "humor" ipso facto excludes a full 51% of humanity from its orbit of jocular camaraderie. The flagrant displays of chauvinism on this forum never cease to astound and dispirit.

 

[Agent327]

I think CFC needs more feminists...

 

[PlutonianEmpire]

See, that's the kind of puerile, penile, philodirectional thinking that just reinforces masculinist pseudobinaries like west/east. What with it's inevitable concomitant, "You aim too, please." Just male latrine humor, except that such "humor" ipso facto excludes a full 51% of humanity from its orbit of jocular camaraderie. The flagrant displays of chauvinism on this forum never cease to astound and dispirit.

If this was a female-dominated society with males being the ones treated like women IRL are, and if the sexes/genders of everyone here on CFC were reversed, meaning the vast majority of OT'ers would be females, including you and me, I'd hazard to guess you'd be complaining about me making vajayjay jokes, no?

 

[Borachio]

The burning question of the moment (well, not that burning), is whether the Eye of Souron looks like a vagina, or not.

 

[Tahuti]

The burning question of the moment (well, not that burning), is whether the Eye of Souron looks like a vagina, or not.

Yes. It represents a sublimation of male's innate, subconscious and psycho-subliminal anti-feminist urges that were indirectly forced onto the Peter Jackson by the Capitalist mode of production and humanity's fear of the unknown. It can also be seen as reaction against all-sweeping analysis of human economic activity like Marxism, or the intertextuality of the Postmodernist condition.

 

[metatron]

Feminism has INDIRECTLY caused:
1. emasculating men
2. shift of science/math to sports in our public education
3. putting animals' rights over human's
4. political correctness and pseudo-equality

what else has it caused? because i'm longing for an Islamic takeover

Some (!) of the popular (!) "feminism" is not a good thing, but i'm pretty sure it has caused none of the above (maybe some part of the "pseudo-equality" but, well, whatevs).
Actual feminism is a good thing, like any other humanism or egalitarianism.
And i have trouble to so much as see what "1" is supposed to be in the first place. I doubt it exists, caused by any kind of feminism or not.

#2 has causes that by and large predate feminism as we know it. If anything actual feminism could act as a remedy regarding that one.

#3 A crushing majority of people, even a crushing majority of feminists, even a crushing majority of activists and propagandists who are invested in changing the treatment of animals do not claim that animals have rights.
Mostly because that's a fairly outlandish claim.
What most of the people that you - as i understand - disagree with are interested in, are in advocacy of, etc. is animal welfare.
Animal rights - animal welfare. Two very different things.

#4 Political correctness is mostly a good thing. Actually it's by definition always a good thing. It's just that we occassionally allow people to devise propaganda tools and quasi fly with those under the radar under the auspice of political correctness.
If we are too complacent to call these people out and proclaim that what they are doing is very much not political correctness, we are to blame for that. The political correctness is not at fault.

i wouldn't say doomed, but for the US, expect balkanization between regions of the country; the worst scenario, mass emigration to Russia (white nationalism is really popular there), if not australia is the 2nd option.

As for the UK, the corrupt govt. is doing nothing in control of its influx of immigrants; best scenario, UKIP wins, worst scenario? Islamic takeover (still better than genocide preaparation in the case of S.A.)

Ok, cultural discord within the US is a very real thing and by no means without significant pontential damage to the US as a whole. But immigration v. white nationalism is not the core issue.
Similarly your concerns about a "takeover" if immigrant culture and customs in the UK is completely misplaced.

These things usually don't work that way. Not at all.
Dortmund would have been Polish for about 100 years now if they did.

 

[ParkCungHee]

I find a lot of irony that the idea that feminism does stuff, and "the west" passively reacts, places "the west" in the feminine gender role.