Previous Entry Share Next Entry
(no subject)
no_ambiguity
1)I've had a few people say to me recently that there is no point in feminism in this country - that women are basically equal. I'm just wondering how common this view is. I think it's entirely wrong, given that women still earn less, are still victims of domestic violence/rape to a greater degree than men, etc...

2)I'm also wondering what type of feminists people are. I've always had problems with feminists who simply want equal rights (bourgeois feminists, as I used to call them). I don't just want to raise the wages of low paid women so that they equal the wages of low paid men, I want to make the wages equal and raise them for both men and women.

Do you think that feminism is relevant in the UK today?

No, there's no need for it - those battles have been won
0(0.0%)
I don't know
1(3.4%)
Yes, there is some way to go
26(89.7%)
Other
1(3.4%)

If you think of yourself as a feminist what do you mean by that?

I want equal rights for women
6(23.1%)
I want equal rights for women, plus other oppressed groups
3(11.5%)
I want equal rights for women, plus I want some kind of economic equality for everyone
3(11.5%)
Other
1(3.8%)
I don't know
1(3.8%)

  • 1
There are other kinds of equality to being allowed to vote, equal earnings and such. (not that we have equal earnings yet anyway).

There's lots of subtle and also less-than-subtle anti-womanism around which is about how people are treated, whether they're trivialised in discussions due to their gender, etc.

For me, feminism isn't just about getting equal legal rights. It's about getting rid of that kind of socialised gender discrimination. For that matter, there's lots of anti-manism too, and a lot of the ideas of feminism are equally useful for dealing with that.

This is pretty much where I stand as well.

The "plus other oppressed groups" bit is somethin I agree with, as well as more economic equality - but I don't count that under feminism.

re: "Plus other oppressed groups"

I think the line's a bit blurry here. Convince someone that the concept of priviledge exists, and in theory you've got "buy feminism, get anti-racism, anti-disabledism etc. free".

Or, if the world worked right you would have, anyway.

Even so, if you can get someone to accept the ideas behind feminism, you've done a lot of the groundwork necessary to fight other kinds of prejudice too.

(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
(Deleted comment)
"I do as it happens believe that there is such a thing as female priviledge as well as male priviledge, at least in the UK. It has less impact and men still get a better deal, but it's nevertheless there. I reject, however, the view that female priviledge has emerged as a result of feminism. I think that the areas in which men are discriminated against (eg. in terms of child care and parental rights) are caused by the very same patriarchal thinking and policies that more widely and intensely discriminate against women."

Definitely my stance as well.

Sexist assumptions and attitudes that are generally detrimental to women can be detrimental to individual men in specific circumstances. Doesn't mean the system as a whole isn't patriarchal though.

equal earnings and such. (not that we have equal earnings yet anyway).

I'd include unequal pay in the "equal rights" category.

I do want equal rights for minorities, and economic equality, but I wouldn't class that as feminism.

I think you're wrong. Surely if you want equal rights for women, but don't care about equal rights for black people (for example), you abandon black women. Also, if you don't care about economic equality, surely you don't care about poor women.

I should probably have added "...but if you want to call that feminism, I won't try and stop you". I find arguing over definitions of feminism to be at best uninteresting, at worst harmful to feminism.

I think it's very important for me to tell bourgeois feminist what's wrong with their views.

Yes, it is, but personally my working definition of feminism is wanting equal rights for women - that includes women of all ages, sexual orientations and ethnicities and therefore encompasses all your other groups, I think?

Hm. I'm trying to think of the best way to express my views here, and I think that the best medium is through hypothetical example...

* A wants equality between the sexes but doesn't care about black people, the poor, etc. A considers itself a feminist. I agree, but I also think that A is a bit of a tool.
* B wants equality for everyone. B considers itself a feminist. I agree.
* C wants equality for everyone. C does not consider itself a feminist. I also agree.

Put simply, if you want equality between the sexes, I think you can call yourself a feminist. If you ALSO happen to want equality between other groups, then that's great. I also happen to think that you can want equality between the sexes without being a feminist.

I don't think of myself as a feminist, but if someone asked me "are you a feminist" and expected a yes or no answer, I'd answer yes.

If they didn't expect a yes or no answer, I'd answer that I want equality between the sexes, including intersex, transgender et cetera. That probably makes me a feminist.

I find your second question quite awkward to answer. By feminist I mean someone who happens to fit broadly within, and accepts, the set of labels "feminist" - in this case, desiring gender equality. I want equal rights for women and for other oppressed groups, and I'd like to work towards equal acceptance as well as just equal rights. I don't think of myself as a feminist, but other people probably think of my views as feminist.

I don't think of myself as a feminist, because I have realised that most feminists would lynch me for saying that I do, being a man.

I definitely think that there is significant inequality and that this is a bad thing. I used to think that was enough to be a feminist, but I'm not sure any more.

(Deleted comment)
  • 1
?

Log in