How can someone be a male and be a feminist at the same time?

[uberrobonomicon4000]

Easily. We advocate gender equality, and this is most lacking in womens' issues.

To exclude men from the discussion altogether would be as segregating as some of the things feminism is trying to do away with.

Yeah, that is because you think there is gender inequality.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

That is plausible. People who cannot or will not stand up for others tend to have serious issues of their own.

Not necessarily, what if they just didn't believe in it?

Also, what if they did but were just telling a joke? A friend of mine, who is a girl, said that to my other friend, who is a guy. Does that mean she is a girl that doesn't support women rights?

 

[Wirey]

Women were put on earth for two reasons: To make men weak, and laugh when they see us naked.

 

[The Sum of Awe]

Women were put on earth for two reasons: To make men weak, and laugh when they see us naked.

Hey, it's better than some of the women I met, telling men to get back in the shop and make them a table

 

[Riverwolf]

Yeah, that is because you think there is gender inequality.

There is.

The fact that game designers have to fight tooth-and-nail to make games with female protagonists is proof of this.

The fact that gamer girls are sexually harassed so often is clear proof of this.

The fact that a Wal-Mart supervisor was perfectly willing to tell a female worker to "act more ditzy" is proof of this.

The fact that the nonsensical "sex sells" business strategy is still widely practiced is proof of this.

You can point to all the laws you want; but the fact is that at the moment, they're little more than lip service. Gender inequality continues to exist, despite the laws. Honestly, this is perfectly expected, since during the postwar years, strict gender roles were heavily encouraged. That's not even a century ago. It's going to take a lot more time than that to fully get rid of gender inequality.

Honestly, the best progress that's lately been made is the fact that the new MLP show has garnered mass appeal beyond the little girl demographic. It's definitely a sign that feminism is working; I can pretty much guarantee that the show would never have been made last decade, or if it had been, it wouldn't have had wide appeal.

If you're going to convince me that gender inequality doesn't exist, you're going to have to start by proving to me that gamer girls are not regularly harassed, that sex sells is not used anymore, that female protagonists are just as easy to make in games as male protagonists, and that hooters went out of business (or that there's a widespread, just as well known male equivalent; I'll accept either one).

Good luck with that.

 

[uberrobonomicon4000]

There is.

The fact that game designers have to fight tooth-and-nail to make games with female protagonists is proof of this.

The fact that gamer girls are sexually harassed so often online is clear proof of this.

The fact that a Wal-Mart supervisor was perfectly willing to tell a female worker to "act more ditzy" is proof of this.

The fact that the nonsensical "sex sells" business strategy is still widely practiced is proof of this.

You can point to all the laws you want; but the fact is that at the moment, they're little more than lip service. Gender inequality continues to exist, manifested in the society.

Honestly, the best progress that's lately been made is the fact that the new MLP show has garnered mass appeal beyond the little girl demographic. It's definitely a sign that feminism is working; I can pretty much guarantee that the show would never have been made last decade, or if it had been, it wouldn't have had wide appeal.

You are preaching to the choir with all of this.

None of this has anything to do with equal rights.

Gender Bias? Maybe. Equal Rights? No, an outstanding no!

You might as well let women and men use the same public restroom instead of having two different public restrooms for both men and women.

If feminism is nothing more than a marketing tool then great. But stuff like my little pony not appealing to boys? Seriously? Its marketed towards little girls.

 

[Riverwolf]

You are preaching to the choir with all of this.

None of this has anything to do with equal rights.

Gender Bias? Maybe. Equal Rights? No, an outstanding no!

You might as well let women and men use the same public restroom instead of having two different public restrooms for both men and women.

If feminism is nothing more than a marketing tool then great. But stuff like my little pony not appealing to boys? Seriously? Its marketed towards little girls.

Then tell me why it has a HUGE male fanbase? That's the progress I'm referring to: that enough men were willing to overlook their machoism in order to enjoy what is genuinely a good show, and to express that enjoyment freely with other fans, male and female alike. Sure, male-directed shows have had appeal to both genders, but the idea that a little-girl-directed show found mass male appeal is unprecedented (...actually, that's not 100% true; male otaku have been fans of Sailor Moon and other shoujo anime since they first started coming over here. But they have always been the exception because until very recently, otaku have been underground.)

But the issues I brought up are the ones I focus on. You need to convince me that these issues don't exist anymore if you want to convince me that gender inequality doesn't exist anymore.

Why are they rights issues? 'Cause the ones with the power to stop them are doing nothing. Like I said: the laws are little more than lip service.

Even if they weren't rights issues (and that can be sensibly argued), feminism doesn't just tackle rights; it tackles social inequalities as well. That's where I put my focus. Surely you don't deny that social inequalities between the genders are still a big problem?

And for the record, the restroom thing is nonsensical. Something that petty and harmless is not an issue at all. I wonder how you can compare the fact that there are gender-segregated restrooms to the fact that girl gamers get sexually harassed simply because they ARE female, while male gamers don't get the same harassment at all? I somehow suspect that you didn't intend to, and made the statement without providing clear context for why you said it.

 

[uberrobonomicon4000]

Then tell me why it has a HUGE male fanbase?

Are you referring to males as little boys or grown men?

I can't answer the rest of your questions until I figure out what you mean by my little pony having a huge male fan base.

 

[Riverwolf]

Are you referring to males as little boys or grown men?

I can't answer the rest of your questions until I figure out what you mean by my little pony having a huge male fan base.

Boys of all ages, pre-teen, teenaged, and grown.

Were you unaware of the Brony community?? (BTW, any bronies reading this... I think the show is good, and very much enjoy most of the episodes when they're on, but I'm not a brony myself.)

 

[uberrobonomicon4000]

Boys of all ages, pre-teen, teenaged, and grown.

Were you unaware of the Brony community?? (BTW, any bronies reading this... I think the show is good, and very much enjoy most of the episodes when they're on, but I'm not a brony myself.)

Thanks for clearing that up. I didn’t think my little pony had a huge male fan base because I don’t watch it and probably never will.

When people start complaining or making a big fuss about inequalities and gender bias due to a show not appealing to “males” when its marketed towards kids and girls, I stop taking debates seriously.

Then tell me why it has a HUGE male fanbase? That's the progress I'm referring to: that enough men were willing to overlook their machoism in order to enjoy what is genuinely a good show, and to express that enjoyment freely with other fans, male and female alike. Sure, male-directed shows have had appeal to both genders, but the idea that a little-girl-directed show found mass male appeal is unprecedented (...actually, that's not 100% true; male otaku have been fans of Sailor Moon and other shoujo anime since they first started coming over here. But they have always been the exception because until very recently, otaku have been underground.)

But the issues I brought up are the ones I focus on. You need to convince me that these issues don't exist anymore if you want to convince me that gender inequality doesn't exist anymore.

Why are they rights issues? 'Cause the ones with the power to stop them are doing nothing. Like I said: the laws are little more than lip service.

Even if they weren't rights issues (and that can be sensibly argued), feminism doesn't just tackle rights; it tackles social inequalities as well. That's where I put my focus. Surely you don't deny that social inequalities between the genders are still a big problem?

And for the record, the restroom thing is nonsensical. Something that petty and harmless is not an issue at all. I wonder how you can compare the fact that there are gender-segregated restrooms to the fact that girl gamers get sexually harassed simply because they ARE female, while male gamers don't get the same harassment at all? I somehow suspect that you didn't intend to, and made the statement without providing clear context for why you said it.

I like sports, watch sports with women who like them and some are more up-to-date on the teams I like than me. Same with video games, there are females who play video games and don’t spend 24 hours out of the day crying gender bias, because it’s something they enjoy playing or doing.

I don’t see or understand why anyone, particularly a male would want to complain about my little pony not appealing to them, especially if it is a show they like. It just doesn’t make any sense. Why ruin something with an overly biased opinion?

The point about restrooms is a good example and I will continue to use it every time I hear someone that claims to be a feminist and shouts gender bias. Think I will go start a campaign now to call for desegregation of gender discrimination of public restrooms (I say that half-jokingly).

 

[oldbadger]

Are you referring to males as little boys or grown men?

I picked your last post.
You know, uberrobonomicon4000 , I pretty disgusted about all this negativity of yours; I'm even more disgusted with the shameful responses I have received from the Kentish people of England over the last few months. As a result of earlier threads covering this same subject (they pop up every few weeks) I have asked every householder that I have visited (hundreds) and every colleague in my mate's cleaning company (scores) about this. I have explained in careful detail that men who support equal rights regardless of gender, sex, sexuality, marital status etc etc are Feminists.

I have to tell you that the responses, (somewhat more negative than yours,) have ranged from staring faces with lifting upper right lip followed by the words 'Yer Wuh?', to middle-class women screaming their heads off and calling their husbands in from the garage to hear for themselves. In one serious case I thought the lady was going to wee herself (I had just cleaned her bloody carpet). One frightful bore started to expand on this idea (screeching with disgraceful and uncontrolled joy) as follows:-

All humans (including males) who support male-female equality should be known as Feminists.
All humans who support disabled equality should be known as 'invalidists'.
All humans who support the hearing-impaired should be known as 'deafists'
All humans who support age-equality, opposing age-discrimination should be called oldies.
All humans who support the rights of any and all religions should be called 'religionists'. (This includes atheists, she said, before she screeched yet again).
All humans who support nationality equality shall be called nationalists.
All humans who donate for the blind and guide-dogs for the blind should be called 'unsightedists'.
She carried on in between spasms of uncontrollable joy and laughter to include names for those who support all kinds of disabilities, individualisms and variations. I am deeply ashamed of my neighbours.

I would have complained bitterly but she gave me a tip so big that I could buy 'deli-of-day' meals instead of kid's 'happy meals' for a whole week. I'm ashamed to report that when I visit properties in Chestfield area on recommendation work I am greeted with smiling faces and 'You're not the feminist are you? How extraordinarily wonderful!!' Then they giggle all the time I'm there.

I don't want this joy and frivolity from ignorant English locals any more, nor do I expect your total lack of appreciation for this mindset. So........ there you have it.

OldBadger. feminist, oldy, unsightedist, deafist, invalidist, etc etc.

 

[uberrobonomicon4000]

I picked your last post.
You know, uberrobonomicon4000 , I pretty disgusted about all this negativity of yours; I'm even more disgusted with the shameful responses I have received from the Kentish people of England over the last few months. As a result of earlier threads covering this same subject (they pop up every few weeks) I have asked every householder that I have visited (hundreds) and every colleague in my mate's cleaning company (scores) about this. I have explained in careful detail that men who support equal rights regardless of gender, sex, sexuality, marital status etc etc are Feminists.

I have to tell you that the responses, (somewhat more negative than yours,) have ranged from staring faces with lifting upper right lip followed by the words 'Yer Wuh?', to middle-class women screaming their heads off and calling their husbands in from the garage to hear for themselves. In one serious case I thought the lady was going to wee herself (I had just cleaned her bloody carpet). One frightful bore started to expand on this idea (screeching with disgraceful and uncontrolled joy) as follows:-

All humans (including males) who support male-female equality should be known as Feminists.
All humans who support disabled equality should be known as 'invalidists'.
All humans who support the hearing-impaired should be known as 'deafists'
All humans who support age-equality, opposing age-discrimination should be called oldies.
All humans who support the rights of any and all religions should be called 'religionists'. (This includes atheists, she said, before she screeched yet again).
All humans who support nationality equality shall be called nationalists.
All humans who donate for the blind and guide-dogs for the blind should be called 'unsightedists'.
She carried on in between spasms of uncontrollable joy and laughter to include names for those who support all kinds of disabilities, individualisms and variations. I am deeply ashamed of my neighbours.

I would have complained bitterly but she gave me a tip so big that I could buy 'deli-of-day' meals instead of kid's 'happy meals' for a whole week. I'm ashamed to report that when I visit properties in Chestfield area on recommendation work I am greeted with smiling faces and 'You're not the feminist are you? How extraordinarily wonderful!!' Then they giggle all the time I'm there.

I don't want this joy and frivolity from ignorant English locals any more, nor do I expect your total lack of appreciation for this mindset. So........ there you have it.

OldBadger. feminist, oldy, unsightedist, deafist, invalidist, etc etc.

Hi, OldBadger – The: feminist, oldy, unsightedist, deafist, invalidist, etc etc.

I’m a lady’s man nice to meet you.

So you get heckled by hecklers in England for being feminist? I don’t find that surprising.

 

[Riverwolf]

Thanks for clearing that up. I didn’t think my little pony had a huge male fan base because I don’t watch it and probably never will.

I don't generally watch it, either(except the two-parter that features Q ^_^), but I do spend a lot of time on the internet.

Being unaware of something that big is actually quite telling.

I like sports, watch sports with women who like them and some are more up-to-date on the teams I like than me. Same with video games, there are females who play video games and don’t spend 24 hours out of the day crying gender bias, because it’s something they enjoy playing or doing.

I don't know of any female who can do that, because we do need to eat and sleep.

So, you're saying sexual harassment of girl gamers is okay?

I don’t see or understand why anyone, particularly a male would want to complain about my little pony not appealing to them, especially if it is a show they like. It just doesn’t make any sense. Why ruin something with an overly biased opinion?

I didn't.

I was pointing out that it gained mass appeal just by virtue of being a good show; it had nothing whatsoever to do with how it was marketed. (In fact, I don't know how it's marketed since I don't watch TV, nor do I actively seek out modern commercials.)

I brought it up to demonstrate the great social progress that feminism has made in the past decade.

The point about restrooms is a good example and I will continue to use it every time I hear someone that claims to be a feminist and shouts gender bias. Think I will go start a campaign now to call for desegregation of gender discrimination of public restrooms (I say that half-jokingly).

Then you don't make any distinction between having segregated restrooms and rampant sexual harassment?

Well, THAT'S why I'm a male and a feminist: I wholeheartedly disagree with that kind of thinking.

 

[dust1n]

The point about restrooms is a good example and I will continue to use it every time I hear someone that claims to be a feminist and shouts gender bias. Think I will go start a campaign now to call for desegregation of gender discrimination of public restrooms (I say that half-jokingly).

You know there are unisex bathrooms right?

 

[dust1n]

Anyone also ever notice that these "feminists" threads actually end up being nothing about the topic introduced in the OP after a few pages, because the threads aren't really so much about the topics introduced, but rather, the OP's blatant to desire to predeterminately bash feminism regardless of the already noted refusal to actually interact with any feminist text and any possible discussion or debate that may incur.


IN this particular thread, it's apparent to basically anyone that no one (making these sorts of threads) is actually interested in "how can someone be a male and be a feminist at the same time," but really, rather, how can I troll you for the next 600 posts without actually engaging anyone's arguments!

And then people sit and wonder why no one takes masculinism seriously.




Well, since it's completely okay to make a decision about a centuries old philosophy without actually reading any of it, here it goes.

Masculinism brings no real new information to the table. I can deduce this because no one I know who is masculinist has brought anything new to the table in terms on concepts.

Masculinism does nothing but try to sell books via shock value by taking a controversial stance, but never using empirical evidence to back assertions up. I can deduce this from watching them talk on television stations on YouTube while they promote their book.

Masculinists are female-haters who are staunchly against feminism because of their insecurity. I can deduce this because there are masculinists who are anti-feminism.

Masculinists are wrong about child custody discrimination. Yeah, women end up with their children more, but none of the studies take into account how the mother was more likely to be a better parent, or how likely it was that the male would have been a bad father, or incapable of working and taking care of children, and that men, in general are brutes and dead beat losers.

For that reason, I will go ahead and assert that the 'custody' gap does not exist. Until someone can show me a study that takes into account every possible human factor and proves that women get children more because of discrimination, than obviously there is no custody discrimination against males.

Also, males aren't actually more like to die. Yes, I know the numbers show that they are, but none of those studies take into account the actions of the individuals, age, drug usage, participation in crime, willingness to go fight into a war. Until someone can show me a study that can specifically show me how men are actually more disposable than women, than I can only say the "male disposability" is a complete fabrication.

 

[dust1n]

No, I'm not, but I do believe such.

I don't believe sexism favors one gender over the other, unlike racism or heterosexism. I see class differences as a much larger issue than gender discrimination, too.

I don't think I understand what you mean. In what sense are you suggesting sexism is omnidirectional and racism is not? Could you elaborate, cause I can't really quite make sense of this what you are using as distinguishing factors? Thanks.

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Anyone also ever notice that these "feminists" threads actually end up being nothing about the topic introduced in the OP after a few pages, because the threads aren't really so much about the topics introduced, but rather, the OP's blatant to desire to predeterminately bash feminism regardless of the already noted refusal to actually interact with any feminist text and any possible discussion or debate that may incur.


IN this particular thread, it's apparent to basically anyone that no one (making these sorts of threads) is actually interested in "how can someone be a male and be a feminist at the same time," but really, rather, how can I troll you for the next 600 posts without actually engaging anyone's arguments!

And then people sit and wonder why no one takes masculinism seriously.

I'm starting to notice that too. Seems to me than when people have something to hide, they quickly engage in troll mode.

Well, since it's completely okay to make a decision about a centuries old philosophy without actually reading any of it, here it goes.

Masculinism brings no real new information to the table. I can deduce this because no one I know who is masculinist has brought anything new to the table in terms on concepts.

Masculinism does nothing but try to sell books via shock value by taking a controversial stance, but never using empirical evidence to back assertions up. I can deduce this from watching them talk on television stations on YouTube while they promote their book.

Masculinists are female-haters who are staunchly against feminism because of their insecurity. I can deduce this because there are masculinists who are anti-feminism.

Completely agree. It's just another "things were better back in the old days," which considering how women were treated in the "old days," is a blatantly sexist comment.

Masculinists are wrong about child custody discrimination. Yeah, women end up with their children more, but none of the studies take into account how the mother was more likely to be a better parent, or how likely it was that the male would have been a bad father, or incapable of working and taking care of children, and that men, in general are brutes and dead beat losers.

For that reason, I will go ahead and assert that the 'custody' gap does not exist. Until someone can show me a study that takes into account every possible human factor and proves that women get children more because of discrimination, than obviously there is no custody discrimination against males.

I don't know. This is the one argument from men's rights that I find plausible. And America does need to take a hard look at its absurdly high divorce rate.

Also, males aren't actually more like to die. Yes, I know the numbers show that they are, but none of those studies take into account the actions of the individuals, age, drug usage, participation in crime, willingness to go fight into a war. Until someone can show me a study that can specifically show me how men are actually more disposable than women, than I can only say the "male disposability" is a complete fabrication.

Yeah I seriously :biglaugh:'ed when I first saw that. Until I realized they meant it, to which my reaction was .

Great post. Have some frubals.

 

[dust1n]

I'm starting to notice that too. Seems to me than when people have something to hide, they quickly engage in troll mode.

I literally just can't see the purpose other than being reactionary for the sake of being reactionary.

Completely agree. It's just another "things were better back in the old days," which considering how women were treated in the "old days," is a blatantly sexist comment.



I don't know. This is the one argument from men's rights that I find plausible. And America does need to take a hard look at its absurdly high divorce rate.



Yeah I seriously :biglaugh:'ed when I first saw that. Until I realized they meant it, to which my reaction was .

Great post. Have some frubals.

Just to be clear I was be facetious. I see value in the concept of male disposability, and even agree with some of stuff Warren Farrell rights (though that doesn't mean I need to go on a personal crusade to replace feminism, and misrepresent the difficulties women face, present or past).

But, Jesus, if you put any of these claims under the same insane standards for legitimacy that all of feminism has had to suffer in the last 2 years on the forum regarding gender gap, discrimination in workplaces/public service, the unbalance of rape and sexual assault, even to the word itself not being suitable because it only 'includes women,' than all of Warren Farrell's writings would be completely useful.

But of course there is a double standard. I mean, it's not like anyone actually reads anything from either side anyway, and has no intentions to. It amazes me that people think they so easily control the realm of all human knowledge, grasp it, and yield to their will, without ever even really engaging in any of it. It's like if I wrote a fifty page dissertation on Being and Nothingness though I've never read anything about Jean Paul Sartre, outside of a ten minute Youtube video.


And thanks for the frubies. The one upside to these threads!

 

[oldbadger]

Hi, OldBadger – The: feminist, oldy, unsightedist, deafist, invalidist, etc etc.

I’m a lady’s man nice to meet you.

So you get heckled by hecklers in England for being feminist? I don’t find that surprising.

Hi.......again!

Lady's man? Me too!

I don't get heckled by hecklers in Kent, England. No.
You don't understand. When I bring this subject up, nobody heckles me, they just either look dumbfounded, or chuckle or scream with laughter.

It's not 'some hecklers'......... it's everybody I have mentioned this to in several months. One man pointed out that our anti-discrimination laws, which started to be passed over thirty years ago (we moved quicker than America) have just been totally covered by one huge Act, the Equality Act, bringing all together under one document, and that therefore (he says) the people of Britain recognise EQUALITY whilst shunning unnecessary junk like 'feminism'.

I, a lone disciple, calling out to the stupid in darkest Kent, have made no ground, nor found one single follower. Not even Mrs Badger.

 

[Riverwolf]

the people of Britain recognise EQUALITY whilst shunning unnecessary junk like 'feminism'.

Kind of a strange statement. It's like saying Britain recognizes equality while shunning anyone who is in favor of equality...

But I understand that feminism has a different connotation there.