Are you a feminist?

[Varg|Hund]

Right, I've been gone for a while, so I don't know if there's already been a thread like this (and I'm way to lazy to use the search button), but here goes..
Are you a feminist?
By feminist I mean feminist in it's 'real' meaning, not the radical kind of feminism that some people advocate. For me, feminism basicly means that everyone, regardless of gender, should have the same opportunities, the same salaries, and be allowed to live their lives without oppression and fear.
It's an unfortunate but true fact that in todays society women are opressed, wether they notice it or not. Women are often discriminated in the job market, and tend to recieve lower saleries than men, even though they're doing the exact same job (in Sweden, for example, women earn about 30% less then men). Women are also the primary victims of sexual violence, both physical and mental, and are also most affected and pressed by the sick beauty ideals that exist everywhere in the western world today.
Women are also generally given less mental space (I'm not sure if that's the right word, but what I mean is that their opinions are given less weight then those of men, and that men tend to ignore women when in a discussion) then men, and are less listened to. This is something all men contribute to, knowingly or not.
So, being a feminist is to recognize that all this happens and is a problem, and to actively try to fight it, both by trying to better oneself, and by enlightening other men and women about the problem. So, are you a feminist?
(and I'll be very surprised if anyone answers No..)

oh, and please excuse my crappy english. I haven't used the language in a while

 

[bliink]

welcome back.. never thought you'd return!

I'm all for feminism, mostly.. I mean, I don't realistically expect 100% equal treatment because there are differences in gender that will always make a difference.

 

[el Chi]

there are differences in gender that will always make a difference.

Such as male pig-headedness?
Not all men, naturally. Just some. Well, lots.
Oh Lord, I can't see this thread going particularly well in terms of the old sexist bullshit.

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Yep, I fit that description and hopefully most/all people are.

I find that the gender differences make little to no difference in most scenarios.
Like bliink said, there's not going to be total equality in every aspect, but it honestly should be 100% where it counts: in schools, the workplace and etc.

Edit: I agree, Chi.
Sadly, chances are a truckload of kids are going to join this thread going "lolol get me a sammich" or "stay in tha kichen beeyoths".

 

[gick]

Although I wouldn't generally call myself a 'feminist', (for me, that implies being pro-women as opposed to pro-equality) if we go by the definition in the original post, then hell yes.

 

[bliink]

Edit: I agree, Chi.
Sadly, chances are a truckload of kids are going to join this thread going "lolol get me a sammich" or "stay in tha kichen beeyoths".

I shall fix these people, if they dare to make me try. (and only if they're being idiots)

 

[Venmoch]

That said however, everyone who believes in equal rights for everyone in general is a feminist, or at least feminism in its purest form.

The problem is that feminism is often used as a justification for actions or as an excuse by many women. You know the ones who believe that women are superior to men and theres some sort of male conspiracy to opress women. There are also those that feel they should be treated equally to men but also demand they should be treated as women in the traditional sense as well.

I mean I personally treat women in the traditional sense because of the way I was brought up, but I do that because I want to. Not because they demand it. But nevermind.

Feminism is a good thing. And I support it. I just dislike the feminazi types that use feminism to their own ends.

 

[Steven]

Am I a feminist? No.

 

[bliink]

I've never felt the desire to have people treat me in the "traditional sense". I feel wrong being treated a particular way simply because of gender.

I'm most happy simply when I'm accepted as "one of the guys", even though I probably carry on a bit like an annoying woman.

Sure, women aren't the same as men, but I'm not going to ever be upset at people not standing when I enter a room, or not opening doors for me- those are mostly superficial things anyway.

Giving your seat to a pregnant woman- theres an example where I would expect people to treat a particular gender differently with justification.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Hey Varg, does this mean you're back for good?

I voted yes, although it doesn't make sense to me that it's called feminism.

 

[nutcrackr]

Absolutely.

 

[jerkasaur]

yes i am.

 

[el Chi]

for me, that implies being pro-women as opposed to pro-equality

Yeah, but that's when people cross the line from "feminist" to "man-hater", which is a different kettle of fish entirely
God, that's a good phrase.

 

[15357]

Well, in that case, yes.

I believe everyone, regardless of gender should have equal opportunities, IF they can handle it.

And also the same duties too. *coughmilitaryconscriptionandtourofdutycough*

 

[$kelet0r]

back in the kitchen women and make me a sandwich ... i knew adding an extra metre to that metal chain was asking for trouble ...

i mean female dominance yay
<.< |.| >.>

 

[el Chi]

I believe everyone, regardless of gender should have equal opportunities, IF they can handle it.

I'm curious as to what you mean by "IF they can handle it" - care to expand?

 

[15357]

I meant that both sexes have physical differences that may uh.. hinder some um.. productivity of the worker.

Nothing other than that meant.

 

[The Monkey]

When I made a thread back in the days people started to flame me because I said that everyone who believes in gender equality is a feminist.

 

[CrazyHarij]

hells yeah I'm a feminist, I only slap them bitches when they deserve it.

 

[CptStern]

I'm more of a humanist than a feminist: I recognize problems for all minority groups not just women.

I believe everyone, regardless of gender should have equal opportunities, IF they can handle it.

this is a non-issue and complete nonsense ..you cannot judge on gender alone, I've met a few women in my lifetime that could probably wipe the floor with 90% of the men I know. Women can be just as strong as men. Take the construction industry for example; the argument is always that women cant physically do the job ...well have you ever been on a construction site? you wont see anyone carrying 150lb bags of cement, or a 300lb door frame. Some women are just as capable as men and some men are just as incapable as women.

I meant that both sexes have physical differences that may uh.. hinder some um.. productivity of the worker.

no offense but it's a sad world you live in

 

[ComradeBadger]

Humanism for the win

 

[The Monkey]

I'm more of a humanist than a feminist: I recognize problems for all minority groups not just women.

Women are in majority, but I get your point

 

[CptStern]

Women are in majority, ..

it's a festivus miracle! :cheese:

 

[CrazyHarij]

it's a festivus miracle! :cheese:

really? http://www.exitmundi.nl/Sperm problem.htm

 

[el Chi]

Gradually, street life is becoming calmer than it used to be. Less people, less traffic.

Sorry, where does this person live? In a shoe box buried in a forest the back waters of Staffordshire, per chance?

 

[The Monkey]

really? http://www.exitmundi.nl/Sperm problem.htm

I heard that they've made successful experiment of making babies without any semen. I'm not sure how it works, but I think, I repeat, I think that it has something to do with extracting y chromosomes from females directly into the egg. Men may not be so useful after all...

 

[CrazyHarij]

Sorry, where does this person live? In a shoe box buried in a forest the back waters of Staffordshire, per chance?

It's a futuristic scenario dimwit

 

[CptStern]

really? http://www.exitmundi.nl/Sperm problem.htm

in my lifetime the world's population has almost doubled ...your scenario isnt all that likely to happen anytime soon ...not that the thought of carrying dual sawed off shotguns holstered in bandoliers just in case I'm attacked by mutated rats and wild dogs doesnt make me giggle with girlish glee :thumbs:

 

[el Chi]

It's a futuristic scenario dimwit

Dimwit!? He said "is" - present tense, dammit!

 

[Nat Turner]

Hell no I'm not feminist. Men and women are biologically very different (unlike different races), so there's no problem discriminating in legislation. If you can discriminate between animals and humans, then you can discriminate between men and women. Major biological differences mean something.

 

[CptStern]

yes because the differences between species justifies discrimination based on gender ..you need to think before you speak

 

[Nat Turner]

yes because the differences between species justifies discrimination based on gender ..you need to think before you speak

They do. Men and women are an entire chromosome apart, that's more differences than between a man and a chimp.

 

[CptStern]

yes that's the only difference ..chromosones ...could you be any more general?

gandhi and jeffrey dahmer are exactly the same person because they're both humans

it's the False Analogy logical fallacy

 

[Sulkdodds]

'Major biological differences'? Are you a scientist? No?

I thought you didn't believe in legislation anyway.

There are differences between men and women - for example, the way their eyes work (men are better at focusing narrowly on one thing in more detail. But there are differences just as wide between men and men/women and women. Some people are good at different things. Some people have faster metabolisms. Et cetera.

 

[Nat Turner]

'Major biological differences'? Are you a scientist? No?

I thought you didn't believe in legislation anyway.

There are differences between men and women - for example, the way their eyes work (men are better at focusing narrowly on one thing in more detail. But there are differences just as wide between men and men/women and women. Some people are good at different things. Some people have faster metabolisms. Et cetera.

Men and women have different organs, different body ratios, different hormones... all kinds of things. It's stupid to restrict discrimination between the two through legislation.

 

[drunkymonkey]

Of course they should have the same rights. They're people, and because of that, they deserve the rights that people get.

 

[Sulkdodds]

I just realised: duh, there is a male and female version of every animal as well. Whoops!

 

[Nat Turner]

yes that's the only difference ..chromosones ...could you be any more general?

A difference in chromosomes is a very major difference. There's tons of genes packed into them.

gandhi and jeffrey dahmer are exactly the same person because they're both humans

it's the False Analogy logical fallacy

It's actually not, and I never stated that.

 

[Nat Turner]

There are male and female animals as well.

Whoops!

What's your point?

 

[Sulkdodds]

That you can't compare the difference between males and females to the difference between animals. Especially considering that we all start off as females, and that the difference, genetically, between different species is far larger than the (almost non-existent) difference between genders.
Besides, how are you always arguing for no restriction of freedom but then saying it's okay to legislate against women?