The Feminism Thread

[Brickjectivity]

I would defend the terminology's purpose and scope (without peppering in terminology as much as possible), but would you like that? I'm more than happy to explain why new terms are made in plain English if you would. Not an explanation like "this word means this," but an explanation of why we bother with complicated terms at all in general.

It would not address my objection. The bait terms get (ignorant) people angry, coming across as attacks against all men only to then say "Actually we are not attacking all men nor all males. You just do not understand what we mean.". This is calculated bait. 'Toxic feminity' would have a similar impact if someone chose this to start public dialogues. Its a haranging language wrapped around a nucleus of arcane writings. Its meant to be misunderstood.

Appended: It is a losing strategy. After all of the feminist and egalitarian gains in recent centuries, some modern feminists have chosen to fight through insults and are damaging this cause by doing so. We are backsliding. Progress is being lost in the public realm and in hearts and minds. This language is polarizing. I have never seen it win souls. It is a failed language, an experiement that shouldn't have leaked from the lab.

 

[Estro Felino]

I'm reminded of some judge that was having to decide what pornography was for some landmark case that infamously said, "I don't know how to define pornography, but I know it when I see it." I feel the same way about objectification (rather, when something is "overly" objectifying, objectifying in some negative way): I don't know how to define it explicitly, but I know it when I see it. I think people will probably have objectification alarms tingle over different things, and I'm not sure what can be done about that.

The OP says this thread is about the complaints I have about feminism.
In our Western World feminism is still useful to eliminate the economic and social differences between the two genders especially in the labor field, or in the marriage legislation.
In my opinion it shouldnt be about sex or sexual objectification. Just that.
Also because I as a woman might tend to objectify men. Which I don't think it bothers men.

 

[Meow Mix]

It would not address my objection. The bait terms get (ignorant) people angry, coming across as attacks against all men only to then say "Actually we are not attacking all men nor all males. You just do not understand what we mean.". This is calculated bait. 'Toxic feminity' would have a similar impact if someone chose this to start public dialogues. Its a haranging language wrapped around a nucleus of arcane writings. Its meant to be misunderstood.

Appended: It is a losing strategy. After all of the feminist and egalitarian gains in recent centuries, some modern feminists have chosen to fight through insults and are damaging this cause by doing so. We are backsliding. Progress is being lost in the public realm and in hearts and minds. This language is polarizing. I have never seen it win souls. It is a failed language, an experiement that shouldn't have leaked from the lab.

I disagree; but I’m getting mixed signals on whether you wanted a discussion on it or to vent it. The language is not opaque for anyone that does a five second google on it in my opinion; and I think the language serves a purpose for sussing out the problem while leaving non-toxic masculinity intact: it does exactly the opposite of what you accuse.

 

[Meow Mix]

The OP says this thread is about the complaints I have about feminism.
In our Western World feminism is still useful to eliminate the economic and social differences between the two genders especially in the labor field, or in the marriage legislation.
In my opinion it shouldnt be about sex or sexual objectification. Just that.
Also because I as a woman might tend to objectify men. Which I don't think it bothers men.

My response to this would be that we all have the issues that we care about; feminism is an umbrella for many issues that impact women. Things like ubiquitous objectification are things that both affect women and that some women care about, so it simply goes under the umbrella. It doesn’t mean everyone that cares a lot about feminism in general has to care about everything under the umbrella.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I disagree; but I’m getting mixed signals on whether you wanted a discussion on it or to vent it. The language is not opaque for anyone that does a five second google on it in my opinion; and I think the language serves a purpose for sussing out the problem while leaving non-toxic masculinity intact: it does exactly the opposite of what you accuse.

English is an expressive language, and any professor or doctor knows connotations convey meaning. Someone chose angry, accusative words. It was a mistake. That five second google search is hurting the movement.

 

[Meow Mix]

This Quora answer from a trans man sums my own thoughts up well:

View attachment 54845

View attachment 54843

View attachment 54844

I’m in bed on my phone and this one is going to take a keyboard, so I’ll come back to it tomorrow (meaning today, it’s “tomorrow” to me as a night worker lmao).

There’s a response for every complaint made here, and I’ll supply them.

 

[Meow Mix]

English is an expressive language, and any professor or doctor knows connotations convey meaning. Someone chose angry, accusative words. It was a mistake. That five second google search is hurting the movement.

How does one refer to a concept like toxic masculinity with a different term, to stick to the example?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I’m in bed on my phone and this one is going to take a keyboard, so I’ll come back to it tomorrow (meaning today, it’s “tomorrow” to me as a night worker lmao).

There’s a response for every complaint made here, and I’ll supply them.

Okay. And to be clear, his words were harsher, more direct, and more blunt, than the ones I would have chosen, despite making the same point.

You may have seen me go back and forth on the subject of Feminism. Well, whenever I do my own research, including on Wikipedia, I end up kind of disliking Feminism, but whenever I talk to RF, it makes more sense. It's weird like that.

 

[Meow Mix]

Okay. And to be clear, his words were harsher, more direct, and more blunt, than the ones I would have chosen, despite making the same point.

You may have seen me go back and forth on the subject of Feminism. Well, whenever I do my own research, including on Wikipedia, I end up kind of disliking Feminism, but whenever I talk to RF, it makes more sense. It's weird like that.

Well, it is a large umbrella. It’s sort of like… capitalism. By that I mean it has its defenders, it has its detractors, it can be made to look good or terrible on paper. Some people hate it vehemently and want to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Some people worship it. Then there are reasonable people in between.

 

[Brickjectivity]

How does one refer to a concept like toxic masculinity with a different term, to stick to the example?

Let us suppose that I wish to win people to my cause. I might choose words that don't sound like they intend "Men are the root of all problems in this world." I could choose "Toxic behaviors" and "Ignorant old world order" or any number of other choices. I could, given time, come up with ten of each. So could you -- I think. I have seen the negative impact of this poor choice of words, angry accusative words. They are digging a grave for feminism. They may not be killing it, but they are bringing it ill repute.

 

[Meow Mix]

Let us suppose that I wish to win people to my cause. I might choose words that don't sound like they intend "Men are the root of all problems in this world." I could choose "Toxic behaviors" and "Ignorant old world order" or any number of other choices. I could, given time, come up with ten of each. So could you -- I think. I have seen the negative impact of this poor choice of words, angry accusative words. They are digging a grave for feminism. They may not be killing it, but they are bringing it ill repute.

If I wanted to quickly convey, “there is a set of behaviors whereby somebody has a conception of what it means to be a man, but their conception contains toxic behaviors; and the problem is that they believe they are not enough of a man unless they engage in those toxic behaviors,” what is a quick way for me to say that? Just saying “toxic behaviors” doesn’t cover it, and the concept of “old world behaviors” doesn’t carry all of that either and might even distract from the point (because some old world behaviors are not toxic)

 

[Brickjectivity]

If I wanted to quickly convey, “there is a set of behaviors whereby somebody has a conception of what it means to be a man, but their conception contains toxic behaviors; and the problem is that they believe they are not enough of a man unless they engage in those toxic behaviors,” what is a quick way for me to say that? Just saying “toxic behaviors” doesn’t cover it, and the concept of “old world behaviors” doesn’t carry all of that either and might even distract from the point (because some old world behaviors are not toxic)

I see, and I sympathize. I suggest "False masculinity" as a much, much less accusative and more conversant phrase. I think it has all the goodness needed to convey the idea that there is a good kind of masculiny while also showing the idea that there exists a harmful expression of masculinity which is not truthful. Its in two words only. If we switch to this I predict much better conversations. Another option is "toxic false masculinity." Some other options are "Popular masculinitiy," "Fictional masculinity" (not my favorite) or something that suggests it needs looking up on google such as "Fixative masculinity." Compared to these the term 'Toxic masculinity' breaks a folding chair over my head and says I'm a weenie unless I attack the speaker. The phrase 'Toxic masculinity' can only be intended to upset me. It is precise gaslighting.

 

[Meow Mix]

I see, and I sympathize. I suggest "False masculinity" as a much, much less accusative and more conversant phrase. I think it has all the goodness needed to convey the idea that there is a good kind of masculiny while also showing the idea that there exists a harmful expression of masculinity which is not truthful. Its in two words only. If we switch to this I predict much better conversations. Another option is "toxic false masculinity." Some other options are "Popular masculinitiy," "Fictional masculinity" (not my favorite) or something that suggests it needs looking up on google such as "Fixative masculinity." Compared to these the term 'Toxic masculinity' breaks a folding chair over my head and says I'm a weenie unless I attack the speaker. The phrase 'Toxic masculinity' can only be intended to upset me. It is precise gaslighting.

“False masculinity” may do the trick, so I concede the point about whether it could be said otherwise. I’m going to bed here (or so I keep telling myself). I’ll reflect on whether it should be done. I wouldn’t flinch at “toxic femininity” because it already seems to me it’s demarcating out a type of femininity. But maybe that’s just me, maybe better branding would be a thing. Brain be tired. No think good anymore today.

 

[PureX]

It's too big a topic. Feminism means a lot of different things to different people.

For myself, I have no complaint about feminism, as I perceive it.

 

[Meow Mix]

It's too big a topic. Feminism means a lot of different thing to different people.

For myself, I have no complaint about feminism, as I perceive it.

Yep, this is part of why I started the thread too. It really does mean a lot to different people. But I hoped to be able to give responses to misgivings people had, even if it’s “yep, some feminists think that way, but there are many reasonable feminists that do not.” And so forth. Either dispel misconceptions about monolithing feminism or otherwise discuss anything related. <3

 

[Revoltingest]

The last time I created a thread about why I wasn't a feminist,
they arrived to blow up & lock the thread. Some difficult ones
are long gone. Will it fare better now? Can the great & wise
@Meow Mix bring us into an age of civility & understanding?

From THHGTG....
"Feminism is big big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely,
mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way
down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to feminism.”

There's nothing productive in railing against TERFs & other
extremophiles...no one here agrees with them (I assume).
So what about feminism that could be criticized...something
true for most of the flavors spanning the continuum?
Some possibilities....
- Blaming men for problems that boil down to women's choices,
eg, no pockets on clothing, skimpiness.
- Inattention to discrimination against men, & advantages to women,
eg, military draft, child custody, acceptance of F on M violence.
- Denigration of men's rights activism by focusing upon the
extremists, not not judging themselves by this method.
- Seeing disagreement as victimizing them, ie, "gaslighting".
- Blaming "The Patriarchy", a nebulous boogeyman, too much.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Let us suppose that I wish to win people to my cause. I might choose words that don't sound like they intend "Men are the root of all problems in this world." I could choose "Toxic behaviors" and "Ignorant old world order" or any number of other choices. I could, given time, come up with ten of each. So could you -- I think. I have seen the negative impact of this poor choice of words, angry accusative words. They are digging a grave for feminism. They may not be killing it, but they are bringing it ill repute.

In my opinion, a lot of the people who assume "toxic masculinity" is a blanket condemnation of men or concepts of masculinity rather than a subset thereof are prone to jumping to conclusions and reactionary, poorly researched stances, so the terms you proposed above might not be enough to change their minds either. It isn't difficult to look up what the average feminist means by "toxic masculinity" or "patriarchy," yet there are anti-feminists who, whether intentionally or unintentionally, insist on specific misunderstandings of these words and use said misunderstandings to demonize feminism or portray it as a man-hating movement.

Feminism is a very large movement encompassing many different and sometimes diametrically opposed worldviews, since the only common factor among them all is generally the pursuit of equal rights and opportunities for women. As a result, the movement is bound to have its fringe elements and extremists like any other movement of a large scale, but I think the majority of feminists don't fall within the extremist category.

A term like "patriarchy" or "toxic masculinity" may not be the most flattering to a lot of people, since it challenges widespread notions of power structures and gender roles and behaviors, but without being willing to step outside comfort zones and traditional thinking, I don't think society can effectively tackle all of its problems, especially the longer-term ones such as gender inequality and toxic notions of what "masculinity" should be (i.e., toxic masculinity).

 

[pearl]

Okay, since this is nearly a daily topic anyway, let's do this while trying to keep things civil in a dedicated thread.

Even within biblical interpretation there is a feminist approach.

Feminist exegesis has brought many benefits. Women have played a more active part in exegetical research. They have succeeded, often better than men, in detecting the presence, the significance and the role of women in the Bible, in Christian origins and in the church. The worldview of today, because of its greater attention to the dignity of women and to their role in society and in the church, ensures that new questions are put to the biblical text, which in turn occasions new discoveries. Feminine sensitivity helps to unmask and correct certain commonly accepted interpretations which were tendentious and sought to justify the male domination of women.

 

[Debater Slayer]

This Quora answer from a trans man sums my own thoughts up well:

View attachment 54845

View attachment 54843

View attachment 54844

The answer seems to contain too many excessive generalizations and offhand dismissal of complicated issues such as campus rape and the wage gap. Furthermore, saying third-wave feminism is "fascism" seems extremely hyperbolic given that there's an actual rising tide of fascist sentiment in multiple parts of the Western world, and many of the figureheads of this trend are quite conservative and strongly opposed to common feminist ideals.

I also don't know how the author of that answer judged that most feminists are "extremists" or that they seek an exact 50-50 divide in workplaces, CEO positions, etc. While there are feminists who have such beliefs, the majority I've talked to and followed online don't. I have no idea where the author of the answer has been looking, but regardless of that, I find that judging the majority of third-wave feminists, who amount to millions of people in different countries, as "extremists" or supporters of a "fascist" movement without compelling evidence is both unreasonable and inconsistent with the supposed concern for egalitarianism that "modern feminism" allegedly no longer pursues.

One of the issues I've encountered when looking up questions about certain topics online--such as feminism, Marxism, and free speech--is that many internet circles are rife with misconceptions and ideologically charged, hyperbolic conclusions surrounding said topics. I don't know whether that's due to a proliferation of problematic trends such as sexism and reactionary, improperly researched stances among certain circles (such as the gaming community and the YouTube political sphere) or due to extremist minorities' in all political and social camps being the loudest and drowning out reasonable discourse and nuanced takes.

The end result of the above observation is the same, though, and I consequently don't give much weight to such answers as the above one from Quora when trying to answer questions about complex, long-standing social or political issues.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

The answer seems to contain too many excessive generalizations and offhand dismissal of complicated issues such as campus rape and the wage gap. Furthermore, saying third-wave feminism is "fascism" seems extremely hyperbolic given that there's an actual rising tide of fascist sentiment in multiple parts of the Western world, and many of the figureheads of this trend are quite conservative and strongly opposed to common feminist ideals.

I also don't know how the author of that answer judged that most feminists are "extremists" or that they seek an exact 50-50 divide in workplaces, CEO positions, etc. While there are feminists who have such beliefs, the majority I've talked to and followed online don't. I have no idea where the author of the answer has been looking, but regardless of that, I find that judging the majority of third-wave feminists, who amount to millions of people in different countries, as "extremists" or supporters of a "fascist" movement without compelling evidence is both unreasonable and inconsistent with the supposed concern for egalitarianism that "modern feminism" allegedly no longer pursues.

One of the issues I've encountered when looking up questions about certain topics online--such as feminism, Marxism, and free speech--is that many internet circles are rife with misconceptions and ideologically charged, hyperbolic conclusions surrounding said topics. I don't know whether that's due to a proliferation of problematic trends such as sexism and reactionary, improperly researched stances among certain circles (such as the gaming community and the YouTube political sphere) or due to extremist minorities' in all political and social camps being the loudest and drowning out reasonable discourse and nuanced takes.

The end result of the above observation is the same, though, and I consequently don't give much weight to such answers as the above one from Quora when trying to answer questions about complex, long-standing social or political issues.

Good thoughts. I cited this Quora answer because my online research led me down the same philosophical rabbit-hole as what this guy, too, was saying. It seemed simpler than trying to write a page-long post myself, with my sometimes poor grammar skills.