what is feminism?

quote:

---

How do you give the same consideration to everyone's individual wishes?

---

Are you seriously having trouble with this?

quote:

---

But you're odd, no offense. You even said yourself that people are suprised when they find out that you're female.

---

Well, in my world, I'm not unusual. I've had two careers; the horse business and the retail service/restaurant business.Thin-skinned, precious people of either gender tend to be self-selected out of those worlds.

quote:

---

Sure, women were oppressed and men did it. But I don't believe there was a collective goal of men to oppress women.

---

Unless you count, you know, major religions, all the laws passed by legislative bodies of many men that gave fewer or no rights to women, etc.I really don't think it can be denied that males, over the millenia, have worked collectively, and quite openly for most of that time, to maintain their dominance.Men have nearly always actively opposed the sharing of any sort of power with women.

I don't know if I fully agree with this. There are plenty of Americans who would like to try and tell me what being an American is all about, but, upon examination of their outlook, it becomes clear that they have no knowledge of the history of the nation or how it came about and are, thus, basing their definition on ignorance.So, I guess I would say that both opinions have value. People within a movement may define their movement one way and act another, or there may be so many differing forces within a movement as to make a rigorous, one-size-fits-all definition impossible to formulate. People outside the movement may have the benefit of distance or more knowledge than those within a small corner of a movement.I do agree with your and Schraf's definition of feminism. Feminism is, I think, at minimum, as you've defined. But I believe it is also true that feminism can and has stood for differing ideas with different people within the movement.

Well, no, look. If I wanted to know what the Klan stood for, I'd ask one of them. That would be the fairest way to know.If I wanted to know what they do, the effects that their actions have on others, I wouldn't ask anybody - I'd go find out for myself. I'd talk to civil rights leaders, certainly, but I'd keep in mind that they're only telling part of the story. People who supported the Klan would only tell part of the story. And I'd try to find as much evidence that didn't rely on testimony as possible. It's "your", incidentally, and no, it's not irrelevant. Black people in American have a different experience than white people. If I wanted to know what that experience was, white people wouldn't really be the ones to ask about it. But that's exactly what I'm talking about, Jon. Enemies defining their opponents. Why would we expect an enemy to define his opponent in a charitable, fair, or even honest way?We're all humans, right? What could be more human than to demonize your opponents? If I wanted to know what a movement or a group stood for, why would I ask their enemies? If I wanted the whole picture, of course, I'd ask both them and their enemies. As I invite you to do about feminism, and decide for yourself who is more credible - the people fighting for equality and social justice, or the people fighting to prevent those things. Up to you, really. ...wha?I don't understand a single word you've written, here. Or rather - I understand all the words, but they don't add up to any sense.

And, yet, the opinion of African newspaper reader Ubuntu Tutu - who's never been to America - on what it means to be an American is going to be worse than useless.Look, it's astounding to me that this is all contentious. People who are part of a group know what it's like to be part of the group better than people who have never been part of the group. Duh. I don't see how a reasonable person can argue with that.

I have no disagreement with this statement. I would add that he can shed light on what "American" means to him and others like him. His definition will probably contain misconceptions about "American," not being a member of the group, but on some issues he may be more right about what "American" is than most Americans. I think I made a mistake and posted a reply not having read the whole argument. I thought what was being discussed was what feminism is, not what it's like to be a feminist.I don't disagree with the statement that "People who are part of a group know what it's like to be part of the group better than people who have never been part of the group," so I'm glad to see I'm still a reasonable person, at least by this litmus test.

This being the sexist bullshit that I hate feminists for. But it's okay, 'cause you're one of the good feminists Hypocrite!Jon

quote:

---

This being the sexist bullshit that I hate feminists for. But it's okay, 'cause you're one of the good feminists

​

Hypocrite!

---

If it is "bullshit", then can you please provide some evidence that men actually have shared power equally with women over the millenia, major religions haven't taught and encouraged women to be subservient to men and men to be dominant over women, and that men have generally welcomed the opportunity to share social, legal, and political power with women?I'd love to correct my mistaken thinking. Please teach me. Edited by nator, : No reason given.

You don't hate feminists. You hate a caricature of a boogey-woman that you've made up. That's the easiest kind of hate.It's a lot harder to hate real women, real mothers, real sisters.If you're going to try to understand feminism, you have to pull your head out of your... fantasy world and talk to real people.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

What real world experience do you have Jon? I spent some decades working in the business world and did see over that time a significant improvement in attitudes. However, to the very end I saw much more or less open discrimination against women by those in power. It appeared to me that those at the board level of companies (through the 80's anyway) were both older and more inclined to exhibit discrimination in thought, word and, less clearly, deed.I expect that it has improved in the last 15 years as, basically and bluntly, those men die off. There doesn't seem much else that could have changed their ingrained mind set. On the rare (too rare) opportunities that I took to try to point out a problem they were pretty much totally blind to how they were thinking.I suggest that there are still those who are blind to this.

Getting back to what I said to Jon, he'd probably be a poor source about who Americans are, but potentially a good source for information about what America has done. The one is necessarily going to include the other.

I don't hate women, and I don't hate feminism. I hate feminists.

How can you hate feminists without hating feminism? That's like hating racists but not racism.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

quote:

---

I don't hate women, and I don't hate feminism. I hate feminists.

---

If you hate feminists, then, by default, you hate at least some women.And, dude, I'm getting a little tired of your "non-response responses" in this thread.It's clear that you are just rebutting what people say but trying to get out of having to respond to rebuttals yourself.That's lame and cowardly.Either respond substantively to the questions posed to you and engage honestly in the debate, or don't post at all.

Feminism is what nator described. Feminists are what nator is.