You’ve most certainly seen it to be applicable. The issue is, the most arrogant people are always the loudest. People who claim to be feminist, but are terfs or misandrist usually garner the most negative attention and people start to only believe that feminism only means that thing. Feminism isn’t very eye catching. People who are it don’t scream at the top of their lungs.
Feminism is more widespread than you might believe too. Cause it’s really really simple. Women and men are equal, deserve equal rights and for the majority of examples, can perform the same tasks.
You can be upset about it, but humans are dumb. Language is dumb. Terms that people have came up with, the definition that has changed over time, and how it does not relate to things in the present is dumb. Nothing will ever be exactly how you or anybody else wants it to be. It’s a collective that you just have to accept as it is.
That being said, feminism has old roots when we used to pump our wives full of lithium and give them lobotomies. Treating them as equals was not something that was even discussed. You could say you were an egalitarian, but then you would have to also admit you liked people of color, or LGBTQ people. And that was a step too far for some.
Also its not excluding half the population. It’s INCLUDING them. Men are included by default. It’s a term that allows the conversation for how shitty women are typically treated to exist.
One side has all the power in this scenario. Men will always have innate physical capability that outstrips that of women. As such, it is impossible to consider search of equality between genders as anything other ‘feminism’, as men are the only ones with the implicit ability to subjugate the other. Women do not have this implicit ability over men. There is a reason that it’s called feminism which is that women are always the ones being subjugated.
Besides that, feminism is good for men as well. By exploring concepts such as the all-encompassing gender matrix, what it is, and how it is embedded in and affecting society, it can be shown the damage that such concepts do not only to women, but to men as well. For example, why is it considered ‘girly’ to have strong emotions other than anger? This affects many men’s lives in negative ways. Now what if I told you that the “all-encompassing gender matrix” is just a term I used to make patriarchy more palatable to you.
You can say that feminism inherently unincludes half the population, but only because that half already has and has had the vast majority of power in society since pretty much the advent of agriculture, but it could be argued even before then as well…
Equality doesn’t mean equal treatmeant, but equal outcomes. Obvious black and white examples like men don’t need cervix screening.
There are more nuanced things too, like homeless rates, suicide rates, career opportunities, sexual assault victims, education graduation rates, family court biases etc. All things that require nuanced attention between the sexes, and aren’t easy to get right.
99% of feminists are just your every day person, wishing for a more equitable world. There’s fringe parties of every socially political movement. I’ve kind of always wished there was a slightly more balanced name, but the movement started from the suffragettes, so it makes sense from a historical stand point.
Often “equality” is used to refer to legal and societal systems closer to equal treatment, and “equity” is used to refer to systems closer to equal outcomes.
Of course, the terms as defined in the dictionary are very similar, while how close the ideas they represent are when applied depends substantially on what is being considered, when, and how.
Hi, it’s me, a non extreme feminist! (We agree, except on the word never and always, so just read)
Sometimes it looks like extremes because in order to have equality, or equity, you have to change existing systems that promote the inequality and inequity. This to some may look like favouring the minority (power not number), when in fact it could just be trying to undo some of the damage. For example, changing a system that promotes men over women would involve maybe extra research into women’s health, because studies almost always don’t take into account that women’s bodies are different. BMI was built for men, dosages for medication are typically figured out for men, etc. Same goes with other minorites, btw. This extra research may make a majority group member feel like the system is prioritising others to the detriment of their self, when in fact it’s just trying to establish an equilibrium, as that research (from the example) is already there for them.
Now from people? Yes, you are right. Sometimes (you may say often or a hyperbolic always) adherents will be wrong about what feminism is. That’s a struggle that the idea has to contend with just like every other movement. But feminism itself isn’t about extremes of hate, though the systemic change to bring about feminist goals may feel extreme due to the scale of work to be done.
… have you met humans? Moderation is difficult. Capitalism and Communism both have difficulty not sucking due to humans. People always just take everything too far.
I have never seen this to be applicable. From people its always one extreme side or the other.
You’ve most certainly seen it to be applicable. The issue is, the most arrogant people are always the loudest. People who claim to be feminist, but are terfs or misandrist usually garner the most negative attention and people start to only believe that feminism only means that thing. Feminism isn’t very eye catching. People who are it don’t scream at the top of their lungs.
Feminism is more widespread than you might believe too. Cause it’s really really simple. Women and men are equal, deserve equal rights and for the majority of examples, can perform the same tasks.
So you mean equality. Say equality then.
Feminism is a crazy name crazy people invented to shift things to the opposite side, destructively.
You say feminism, but just the fucking word excludes half the fucking population.
You can be upset about it, but humans are dumb. Language is dumb. Terms that people have came up with, the definition that has changed over time, and how it does not relate to things in the present is dumb. Nothing will ever be exactly how you or anybody else wants it to be. It’s a collective that you just have to accept as it is.
That being said, feminism has old roots when we used to pump our wives full of lithium and give them lobotomies. Treating them as equals was not something that was even discussed. You could say you were an egalitarian, but then you would have to also admit you liked people of color, or LGBTQ people. And that was a step too far for some.
Also its not excluding half the population. It’s INCLUDING them. Men are included by default. It’s a term that allows the conversation for how shitty women are typically treated to exist.
One side has all the power in this scenario. Men will always have innate physical capability that outstrips that of women. As such, it is impossible to consider search of equality between genders as anything other ‘feminism’, as men are the only ones with the implicit ability to subjugate the other. Women do not have this implicit ability over men. There is a reason that it’s called feminism which is that women are always the ones being subjugated.
Besides that, feminism is good for men as well. By exploring concepts such as the all-encompassing gender matrix, what it is, and how it is embedded in and affecting society, it can be shown the damage that such concepts do not only to women, but to men as well. For example, why is it considered ‘girly’ to have strong emotions other than anger? This affects many men’s lives in negative ways. Now what if I told you that the “all-encompassing gender matrix” is just a term I used to make patriarchy more palatable to you.
You can say that feminism inherently unincludes half the population, but only because that half already has and has had the vast majority of power in society since pretty much the advent of agriculture, but it could be argued even before then as well…
Equality doesn’t mean equal treatmeant, but equal outcomes. Obvious black and white examples like men don’t need cervix screening.
There are more nuanced things too, like homeless rates, suicide rates, career opportunities, sexual assault victims, education graduation rates, family court biases etc. All things that require nuanced attention between the sexes, and aren’t easy to get right.
99% of feminists are just your every day person, wishing for a more equitable world. There’s fringe parties of every socially political movement. I’ve kind of always wished there was a slightly more balanced name, but the movement started from the suffragettes, so it makes sense from a historical stand point.
Often “equality” is used to refer to legal and societal systems closer to equal treatment, and “equity” is used to refer to systems closer to equal outcomes.
Of course, the terms as defined in the dictionary are very similar, while how close the ideas they represent are when applied depends substantially on what is being considered, when, and how.
Hi, it’s me, a non extreme feminist! (We agree, except on the word never and always, so just read)
Sometimes it looks like extremes because in order to have equality, or equity, you have to change existing systems that promote the inequality and inequity. This to some may look like favouring the minority (power not number), when in fact it could just be trying to undo some of the damage. For example, changing a system that promotes men over women would involve maybe extra research into women’s health, because studies almost always don’t take into account that women’s bodies are different. BMI was built for men, dosages for medication are typically figured out for men, etc. Same goes with other minorites, btw. This extra research may make a majority group member feel like the system is prioritising others to the detriment of their self, when in fact it’s just trying to establish an equilibrium, as that research (from the example) is already there for them.
Now from people? Yes, you are right. Sometimes (you may say often or a hyperbolic always) adherents will be wrong about what feminism is. That’s a struggle that the idea has to contend with just like every other movement. But feminism itself isn’t about extremes of hate, though the systemic change to bring about feminist goals may feel extreme due to the scale of work to be done.
… have you met humans? Moderation is difficult. Capitalism and Communism both have difficulty not sucking due to humans. People always just take everything too far.