What is a feminist, what is feminism, and what is a 'feminazi'? Do you know what they are?

a reply to: Pinke

I am not intending to use Robertson, nor Limbaugh to critique feminism, I am merely drawing attention to where the term 'feminazi' comes from, as well as looking at the knee-jerk reaction some here have whenever the term feminism is brought up. The idea for this thread came up as a response to how freely these terms were being thrown about in another thread, and I felt that terminology was being used by certain posters who seemed to be throwing the terms around without a base understanding of what these words actually mean.

As for third wave feminism, I think perhaps that discussion may be too nuanced, except for a minority of posters who are schooled in, or have an awareness of the history of feminism.

I personally feel that the meaning of the term 'feminist' has become somewhat muddied, and I see no reason not to accept the definition I quoted from Wikipedia. There is far too much obfuscating and division, and due to polemicists like Limbaugh the term itself appears to have become a somewhat dirty word, associated with a distorted and cliched view of what feminism is. Coming to a base meaning may help to clear the air in some ways, instead of those who would freely use terminology that does not reflects the meaning of the terms being used, where instead the words 'feminist' and 'feminazi' become intertwined insults.

a reply to: cuckooold


They are just a bunch of miserable women with such bitterness that they feel the need to stick their beaks into every matter that even seems like it offends their dimwitted outlook!!

Show me some stats on men becoming sex slaves. I'm sure it happens and has happened but I find it utterly impossible that's it's 50/50 gender wise.

"Can't we all just be human, accept we are all different, and embrace it rather than hate, exploit and destroy each other instead? Oh wait, that IS being human. Isn't human nature a bitch?"

Hey man i would love to live in this fantasy world where everyone is accepted for who they are. If the world was made up of nothing but people like who believed in equality for all then it would be. Sadly people hate on other people.

There are militant feminists and PC obsessed assholes. Here's the thing though. If people treated everyone as human beings first they wouldn't exist. So how about we try to fix the problems that cause the reactionary movements and they'll just disappear.

Nah probably better to be a reactionary to the reactionaries. Everyone loves a good counterproductive vicious cycle

a reply to: tavi45

Wait a minute, are you suggesting that men are not victims of abuse unless they are equally as abused as women?

It doesn't matter if its 1% or 50%, or 100%. Victims are victims. Male or female, white or black, rich or poor. If they are abused by evil people then they are victims. Why would their being male and a minority in terms of statistics make their suffering any less valid?

Fact is men all around the world in all areas of life are victims of various things. For example, lets take something that is perceived to affect mostly women - eating disorders like bulimia and anorexia. But this is not true. Many men suffer too, men are less likely to ask for help for various reasons. The same thing often happens with men who are abused. You can bet there are many, many more male abuse victims than are statistically reported, due to them being afraid or unable, for various reasons, to go public with it.

And you completely missed my other point too. Notice how I concluded with "Isn't human nature a bitch?"?

originally posted by: cuckooold
a reply to: Pinke
As for third wave feminism, I think perhaps that discussion may be too nuanced, except for a minority of posters who are schooled in, or have an awareness of the history of feminism.

I personally feel that the meaning of the term 'feminist' has become somewhat muddied, and I see no reason not to accept the definition I quoted from Wikipedia. There is far too much obfuscating and division, and due to polemicists like Limbaugh the term itself appears to have become a somewhat dirty word, associated with a distorted and cliched view of what feminism is.

Thanks for the reply, and I think I understand where you're coming from but ...

Unfortunately I think it's exactly the type of nuance we need if you want to separate feminism from the different types of movements or ideas available, and the main stream one that has steam rolled all other versions into pan cakes that are periodically referred to in history books.

Third wave feminists often post the exact argument made here, and it's far too easy an argument to make. It has no substance or content and is instantly rewarded as if the person saying it actually achieved something. It's like saying that atheism is getting a bad reputation, but all atheism is ... is a disbelief in God! Problem solved right? Except atheists embrace the nuanced conversations about what it means to be an atheist and the practices involved; and they respond to the critiques from individual perspectives. In fact I've seen a remarkable change here on ATS on that topic! It used to be we had to wander into every thread going, 'you're referring to New Atheists, not all atheists' ... now we have a lot of posters specifically referring to New Atheists saving me the effort of having to point it out. It's mega handy!

The above change is what has made me alter my approach when it comes to my feminism. It took a while for people to acknowledge that not all atheists are the same group. It will likely take even longer for people to realize the same thing about feminists, but I'm tired of having to deal with half a dozen presuppositions about my beliefs every time the topic comes up. If mainstream third wave feminism wants to be an all you can eat equality movement that's fine, but lets not pretend its the only game in town.

a reply to: FyreByrd

You're wasting your breath, Byrd. Les Misanthrope believes feminism is a conspiracy against men.

originally posted by: Firefly_
I believe in the full equality and humanity of everyone regardless of their race or gender, or whatever.

But I refuse to wear the label "feminist" because it is divisive, as are all labels, intentionally or otherwise.

Can't we all just be human, accept we are all different, and embrace it rather than hate, exploit and destroy each other instead? Oh wait, that IS being human. Isn't human nature a bitch?

Whether or not you want to wear the label "feminist", that definition is feminism. And my son at 12 knew that and was a feminist, but then he has a very high IQ, 96% college grade in physics with his lowest mark english at 93%. He just thinks deep.

I would have preferred a more inclusive name too, except that in the case of this world that is enslaving and with rampant misogyny and abuse of women world wide, entrenched formally in some cultures, the word was chosen to suggest an opposition to a current problem, or to imply a struggle for justice.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

But isn't 'equality' in general (fail English here...) about getting equal *with* something? As in: White people had certain rights and privileges black or native people didn't, and so they needed emancipation to get to the same level?

You can't get more rights if you have all of them already. Sure there're civil rights issues, I don't deny that, but isn't that a whole other discussion/subject?

a reply to: Pitou


The United States has laws that protect people from discrimination because of race and gender. That being said, laws don't change the views of the people.
Racism is slowly going away and gets better as the older generations are replaced with the young. Women's rights are the same, the more time that passes the better thing will get.

a reply to: tony9802

what does equal rights for women have to do with prostitution?

you do know there are lots of male prostitutes right?

what does it say about you when you hear the term prostitution you automatically think of a woman?

by the definition, i am a feminist.....i never really gave the term and definition much thought until i got together with my wife....i have always been about equal rights but i admit, i was very naive' when it came to the term feminist....i did think that it meant women above men...

i met my wife and found out she was into feminist reading and such...so, i started digging into it as well because i wanted to see what she was about. it really opened my eyes.....
my wife is not some man hating bull dyke......its about equality for both genders and i am down with that...

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If feminism proposes that women are equal, if men are brought lower... has his rights reduced then women by default are lessened also because we're supposed to be equal.

See how that works?

And as to feminism, I may seem to be a feminist here because I spoke in favour of women's rights and emancipation and equality for all. However, (modern) feminism has way too many flaws and ideas that aren't about the core principle anymore but a new ideology system altogether, and with that, with dogmas and logical fallacies.

The first problem I have with them is their modern obsession with 'cultural appropriation'. It means that I (if I'm correct here, if not, please enlighten me) cannot have a hindu statue in my house if I'm not actually a religious hindu. I can't wear clothes that resemble those of other cultures I don't belong to and I even can't twerk. Not that I care about that in the slightest, but I think it's actually somewhat repressive and even (to an extent) discriminatory because it strongly keeps people within their frames and boxes and categorises them accordingly. I fail to see it's purpose in terms of decency, emancipation or other desirable things and it seems more repressive than anything.

The second thing I dislike about feminists is their growing vitriol and oppression of speech. yes, I said that. I'm not really buying the free speech-abuse of ''I can threaten to harm you in horrible ways if I like to'' but they're growing increasingly more vocal about saying anything about weight or obesity among other subjects. I've watched this movement for some time (not very long though, and as I'm in my early 20s I haven't experienced them in the past) and even those that support them but make some little slip-up in their speech or might even say that weight and food consumption are related get verbally attacked. I kind of tend to dislike that. Needless to say, I don't condone bullying or mistreating fat people, but they seem to take it to a new level. This is a rather recent development as it seems and obviously not all feminists do that but it appears to be a growing trend within the movement.

Third, they're nothing anymore. I mean, they're not actually something. Their obsession with inclusiveness and not stepping on cultural toes makes them contradict themselves and even forsake their original goals, such as the emancipation and liberation of women. If you fully submit to a man, obey him at all times and basically erase yourself: go you! If you're too anti-man and anti-'oppression' to even make him a cup of coffee (my view of feminists was badly harmed in my teenage years because of an interview I read in a major newspaper where she said that): Go you! Great!
If you fully cover yourself, constantly hide yourself and basically erase yourself from the street image: yay choice! If you walk around almost naked: cheers!

We need to be able to say: we don't like this cultural aspect. We should be able to, just like in the old days, say: f# stupid and oppressive traditions, this isn't what we want.
And we just don't. Of course there's a huge difference between questioning cultural and religious systems of oppression and forcing people to do things. It's even gotten to the point that they use EXACTLY the same reasoning they themselves hate from others. ''Not all x people do x''.... feminists hate ''not all men do x'' as an 'argument'. So more contradiction, and an almost cowardly hesitation to speak out about anything. So what do they represent? What do they stand for? They usually talk about things such as slut shaming etc, but there're massive issues they willingly ignore.

If I'd live in the USA I'd have a problem. I total agree that the pursuit of equal relationships, liberation of women, the right to choose what you do with who, to not be blamed for other people's actions, the right of choice over your body and future and the right to receive proper treatment in daily life, fair judgement (not your bra size but capabilities etc), basically all those things is vere important. But the movement seems just ridden with silliness that even contradicts their prime goals.

And as for feminazis.. well those that complain about those 'feminazis' are often people who're trying to conserve the 1950s in 2014. They fear repression while they themselves try to defend oppression of women in many ways. I find that a bit hypocritical to say the least

a reply to: Kali74

How exactly are men 'lowered'?

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
It should read: " A feminist is someone who 'advocates or supports the rights and equality of women—and men."

Did you read the VERY FIRST quote in the thread??? Or are you just nit-picking to find something to complain about? What you quoted was not the OP's definition. If you think Wikipedia's definition is wrong, go in and change it.

Fact is, a feminist is someone who advocates and supports the rights and equality of women and men. For women to be equal, they need something to be equal TO. There's a history here. Women have not always been treated equally TO MEN. (I just put that in there in case you thought I meant women should be equal to dogs, shadows or balogne sandwiches.)

I am a feminist, always have been, and I'm married to one as well. I wouldn't have it any other way. Men who get all weird about the word or the idea have some sort of insecurity, IMO. Maybe they feel inadequate in some way...

a reply to: Pinke

Hey

Interestingly I was having a convo about this last night with another ATS Vet... I honestly don't think a lot of 'traditional feminists' even know about this third wave, to be quite honest I didn't even know they had become so vocal as to be considered a third wave, I always thought of them as the lunatic fringe.

I feel the OP is talking about the traditional and that Rush's and the American Right Wing attack on feminism pre-dates this third wave. They certainly don't make any distinction now either. So criticism of feminism as a blanket statement ends up carrying water for misogynists (he is) such as Rush Limbaugh.

How to go about remedying this problem of the third wave, I have no idea. But it seems important to at least, when discussing feminism, make a distinction. Yep /eyeroll ... more language (lol).

a reply to: Pitou

I think you need to read the post I replied to for context.

a reply to: cuckooold

I will tell you what I personally saw and experienced yesterday from these so-called feminists - and why some people, women included, will never be feminists.

I listened to a radio program, where this site espoused further government encroachment into the world of the internet, all in the name of the poor sad helpless little women. No dissent was allowed, no voice of opposition.

Not men condescending, but women putting their own selves down. Women saying, I was attacked only for being female, not for the value of their opinion, nor the threat that opinion meant to the hearer... but simply for being female.

They lacked recognition of their own value, and the weight their opinion carried.

On the internet, those bullies and trolls opposed to the dissenting voice try to hammer that voice down into submission. If its a man doing it to another man, they look for the most sensitive spot to silence the dissent. If its a woman, the internet bully, troll what have you, looks for the most sensitive spot in effort to silence that opposing voice.

It happens daily to men and women both, yet, only the feminists say things like "I was attacked only for being a woman" No... you were attacked because you had a strong voice and someone wanted to silence that voice. They put their own selves down, and every women out their with such a condescending attitude toward themselves.

They refuse to recognize their own power, and their own value, when they try to blame it on their body parts, never once thinking to recognize their mind.

They pretend they are oppressed when they have a million and one rights; whenever they cannot think of enough reasons to pretend victimization, they march out their little pet Muslim women - refusing to allow the little pet Muslim women to speak for their own selves, refusing to recognize the intelligence and ability for choice outside of what these so-called feminists deem "correct".

In doing all this, they make themselves into the oppressor of women when they silence the voice of women and tell the women they do not have enough intelligence to speak and think for themselves.

They say they support a woman's rights, yet all they do is try and become men. To become the oppressor of women. There is nothing feminist in these oppressors of women who place themselves above other women and tell women they don't have the intelligence or ability to make their own damn choices in life.

Women are intelligent. Women have the right to their own decisions concerning their beliefs, their dress, their life. We don't need to be the flag anyone carries to promote censorship and government encroachment. Women can turn off the channel, attend another site, disable comments, and de-freind anyone the same as any man. I wont be used and placed on some helpless little woman pedestal for the removal of anyone elses' rights.

a reply to: cuckooold
I was a "feminist" before it was cool to be one. I have had more discussions, debates, and arguments in my life over this topic than I can count. Ignorance abounds in our society when it comes to this topic. Especially in Western society, because of antiquated Judeo-Christian doctrines and beliefs that are still alive and well today.

Christianity is by far the predominant religion in our society, and it is still the biggest oppressor of women in western society. Misogyny has always been, and still is rampant in Christian based society. Anyone who needs evidence for that only needs to read quotes made by those considered to be the greatest leaders of christianity, in the past, and the present. Tertullian, Martin Luther, Thomas Aquinas, Calvin, Wesley, in the past. And today we have Pat Robertson, James Fowler, Mark Driscoll, John Hagee, and others.

Every woman should be filled with shame by the thought that she is a woman.

–Saint Clement of Alexandria, Christian theologian (c150-215)

Fortunately, there are sects of Christianity that have thrown off this attitude toward women, but there are still far too many churches that cling to it without drawing attention to it frequently. My point being, the prevalent attitude in the founding of America against women still exists today. Fortunately, it is being challenged, and pointed out for what it is, but we have a long way to go before it loses its grip in our Abrahamic religion based society.

a reply to: cuckooold

Women in our culture have made some significant gains. Their vulnerabilities and issues sort of fade back into the noise of their success. Feminism is harder to sell these days - even to other women

Feminism is necessary, a means to an end - that end being the end of subjugation

It's pro equality - and most people (most) understand that that means being pro-freedom, pro-equality for everyone. It's not about world domination or hurting men. At least not usually - every group has it's militant renegades - and I know in the grander scheme of things they serve a purpose too. I think it's probably dangerous or at least not useful for all members of any group or movement to see everything exactly the same way. We don't all have to agree

We're working our way towards an ideal society (...yes, I know...) :-)

It's obvious that different groups need to fight for their rights in different ways at different times and against different types of opposition

Women, gays, minorities of all sorts, certain religions, the poor, the handicapped...the list goes on - all working to change their circumstances in this world. Isn't it funny and kind of a giveaway when people feel the need to speak up for the oppressor whenever we try to speak for the oppressed?

I chose the words oppressed and subjugation because they're so dramatic - real hot buttons. There will always be peeps that simply do not see how this group or that could possibly be oppressed because they are not nor have they ever been oppressors - and now? Now - they are oppressed!

:-)

Obvious discomfort and anger are - obvious

The original message of feminism was OK to me. The idea that a woman ought to reach for what she was capable of doing and not be hindered in it.

Then somewhere along the way, the ideas that all sex is rape, that a woman who decides she really likes the traditional female role is somehow selling out and should be an object of contempt, that all gender differences are somehow only impositions of cultural roles and not actually in some cases biological. etc., cropped up.

Well, guess what? Men and women are different biologically. There are just some things that happen to us as a function of our differing hormones that make us differently abled in most cases. There's a reason that there aren't many women in very physical occupations and pretty much none in men's professional sports, and it has nothing to do with any kind of discrimination and everything to do with our biology. Male hormones naturally build a more powerful body that has an easier time meeting those benchmarks.

Similarly, I work in an office that is very, very heavily female because women tend to have an easier time working with language. It is one of our biological strengths. I don't see men whining about discrimination because there so are do few of them in my line of work.

Look at what has happened in education as a result of the rejection of the idea that little boys and little girls are different. We have a model of educating that is becoming increasingly tailored to the learning styles and behavior models of little girls. Little boys who cannot force themselves to fit that mold are increasingly becoming marginalized and medicated. If you look at the numbers, there are more women at the university level than ever. That is in a sense discriminatory because boys are not being served according to their needs because we have embraced this idea of "equality" to an insane extreme, to the point of ignoring biology. People need to understand that biology is not bigotry, but we persist in believing that if we only force our preferred cultural ideology onto them, our little boys will grow up being perfect little girls.

This is where the current feminism has lost me, but then, I'm the mother of a young boy, and I love who and what he is.