Can you explain the side that proclaims, "A man cannot be a feminist," to us?
No. Can't.
I can't exlain:-
'a man can't be a feminist.'
I can't explain:
'A person who believes in Equality for all must be a feminist'.
Hang on..... grab hold of these descriptions of feminism a-la wiki:-
Feminism in the United Kingdom seeks to establish political, social, and economic equality for women.
United States. Beginning very early on in the late 1800s, women fought for their rights to be heard and allowed to vote. In the next century the desire for women to become more socially equal was the focus of the feminist in the United States. Now in the more modern wave of feminism in this country, the emphasis has shifted to enforcing the equality of all women, no matter their ethnicity, social standing, or sexual orientation.
OK? Now,don't ask me about the USA one. The Brit one is easy to understand. A recent search (by me) has revealed (for me) that feminism isn't as strong here, as you can see from the wiki description. Not only 'not many males' but (with respect to Horroroble) 'not many females' are heavily into feminism, because they're looking beyond it too, now. I tell you, many women here would consider themselves egaliterian before 'feminist' because egalitarian has wider concepts, further horizons, etc etc.
And so...... whilst a man (person) can be feminist, I think they're not spreading their wings wide enough. If Feminism was so strong in Britain, the act that would have consolidated all of our anti-discrimination acts thru the last 35-40 years (passed about 4 months ago) would have been titled THE FEMINISM ACT.
It was not. It was titled
THE EQUALITY ACT. Just covers so much more.