Up Front: Say When
522 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 21 Newer→ Last
-
Emma Hart, in reply to
Yes, the sole reason I've been reluctant to use the label 'feminist' to describe myself is that I really, really don't want to have arguments about whether or not I have the right to use it. And I'm not even a guy, just an unsuitable woman.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
Oh, I'm sure there are also right-wing feminist peeps - I just think it's slightly more likely that the tenets of feminism are problematic for, say, social conservatives who fall under the right-wing banner.
Yes, it would seem to me that it's not incompatible with libertarianism. You could argue that "economic liberalism" is bad for women's lib, but I don't see it as an automatic win.
-
I don’t take on any label to make someone else’s life easier
I don’t even know what this means. How would it make my life easier if you identified as a feminist?
ETA Ah, Ben:
Actually, I like them to do their thing, whatever that thing is, even if I’m not into that thing.
This is a feminist philosophy I believe we can all appropriate for our own purposes. :)
Also, it gives me an excuse to post this:
Which is my favourite sex-positive feminist anthem recorded by men! Fuck it's awesome.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
And, according to certain persons, males can't be feminists because we're all rapists, perhaps because we like to see females dressed in as little as possible. </sarcasm>
I really don't think that's worthy of your sarcasm. Not all men are rapists, but almost all rapists are men, and it's big fucking deal, enough to justify a certain essentialist distrust.
Is that because you don't believe men can be feminists (I totally disagree with this, but realise that some people think it)
Another way of putting it is that in order to be a feminist you have to identify as a woman first, and I don't. I think taking up the perspective of another is quite fraught. Which doesn't stop me from supporting feminist analysis and struggles more than those of pretty much any other intellectual movement, but.
-
Another way of putting it is that in order to be a feminist you have to identify as a woman first, and I don't.
See, I don't get that at all. Conceptually and practically I consider men and women equal, how does my gender matter?
-
BenWilson, in reply to
one can see that Sally has successfully managed to divert and direct the discussion by misquoting or, at least, misunderstanding Giovanni's comment which is a standard tactic in ideological argument, regardless of the flavour of the ideology.
Be a bit fair to her. It was misunderstandable (early bid for word of the year). Knowing Gio, as most commenters here do, it's easy enough to see what he meant, that surely there are still some useful words in the feminist lexicon. He wasn't saying there were none, he was lamenting what had happened to the lexicon.
Cut her some slack on that, at least. Just point it out, rather than construe it as a "standard tactic".
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
Conceptually and practically I consider men and women equal, how does my gender matter?
Equality ain't the same thing as identity.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
because he doesn’t believe that a dude can *be* a feminist, only a feminist ally
Mm. Thought so.
Years and years ago, I thought the same - that only women could be feminists. But supporting feminism, if you like, is being feminist. -
Bart Janssen, in reply to
I’m not a feminist
Nothing to do with the idea that men can't be feminists, although I've seen some women say that. For me the aim should be equality.
I understand that because we have an imbalance now, feminists feel the need to push harder to shift things to a balance point. As a result I see feminists pushing for what is obviously an imbalanced position (but the opposite to what exists now). I understand why they do that and I can even understand why it may be necessary to finally achieve balance - but understanding doesn't change the way I feel - I simply don't feel comfortable pushing for anything other than the balance point where you demand equality but nothing more.
Hence I don't describe myself as feminist, nor does Sally and nor I think would most feminists.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Conceptually and practically I consider men and women equal, how does my gender matter?
Exactly.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Another way of putting it is that in order to be a feminist you have to identify as a woman first, and I don't.
Why identify ? Isn't it that you recognize equal value, equal importance in the grand scheme of things?
ETA: @Bart "As a result I see feminists pushing for what is obviously an imbalanced position (but the opposite to what exists now). "
If it gets out of balance, it ain't feminism in my book! -
Bart Janssen, in reply to
least three male posters here support feminism
Assuming I'm one of them ... I understand (some of) feminism and I support and demand equality but that doesn't feel to me to be feminism. Certainly not as Greer would describe feminism.
It has nothing to do with my gender.
-
One of the things that seems to me to come up particularly acutely in any attempt to discuss both (inter)personal gender relations (how you or I act as individuals in relation to our gender and the gender of others) and how beliefs about gender affect society more generally is the disconnections that occur when we go from the particular to the general and back, but using the same language. This is what I took Giovanni's comment with regard to sociological uses of the terms men/women, upthread, to mean.
When it comes to gender, everyone is part of the general and the particular, but may have more substantive views on one rather than the other, and may also identify their feminism (or otherwise) as aligned with one more than the other. Combine that with using the same nouns and pronouns to talk about big social or cultural structures and individuals (so "men" gets used interchangeably with "the patriarchy" but also means that group of which each man is a part) and it seems like a fast-track to getting pissed off.
I'm a feminist of both kinds, I think, personally and big-structures-wise, but I'm not convinced the linguistic apparatus we bring to internet debating always gives us the best tools to keep the two in play at the same time. What I do think is that one of the points of being part of a collective is that not everyone has to do all of the mental labour all of the time. Personal feminisms - those that focus on autonomy and pleasure, for example - can co-exist and complement big-structure feminisms, I think, but this is a hard notion to defend if in any comment it's not clear whether it's the big picture or the individual that's under discussion. (People who pop up and make meta-critiques such as this are perhaps the most irritating of all.)
-
I’m always reluctant to say more than a little on the subject – because of my views below…
But, for me the reason why men can’t/shouldn’t identity as feminists has to do with power. Patriarchy is about a power relation, rather than what anyone wears (even if particular forms of dress are used as tools of that oppression*), or even particular forms of behaviour** and for that reason men identifying as feminists (or co-opting feminist conversations about what feminism means) is a way of establishing/maintaining power.
Now, it may be that when a society is highly patriarchal it might help more than it hurts. But for me, having men say they support feminism and feminists has none of the costs and almost all of the benefits.
I’ll shut up again now.
*there being nothing inherently patriarchal about the dress itself.
**this being again power/contextually dependent (rape fantasies etc, as the far end of this wedge, with all the discussion that’s gone on about them) -
giovanni tiso, in reply to
Isn't it that you recognize equal value, equal importance in the grand scheme of things?
We might disagree on what that means. To me, it's not about enabling women to occupy positions of power within social structures designed over the centuries by men; it's about changing society and how power operates so that men and women can participate in them equally.
I think tino rangatiratanga is a useful analogy: I prefer to think of it as the means of achieving self determination of tangata whenua through kaupapa Maori, rather than simply placing more Maori people at the top of Pakeha political and corporate structures (on this, I think one could do worse than reading the Bruce Jesson lecture delivered by Annette Sykes last year). Now, I support the aspirations of Maori people towards changing society in this direction, but wouldn't dream of identifying as Maori.
-
Paul Williams, in reply to
Equality ain't the same thing as identity.
I don't know that I follow?
I identify as a man, of the straight white middle-class variety, and appreciate that this means I could readily be part of the "patriarchy" (insofar as my genus is the patriarchy) but I don't agree that this precludes me from having personal views that differ from cultural structure (thanks Megan, I found your meta-critique helpful even if I've mangled it here) in which case, it is possible that I could be feminist (the test though is separate).
ETA: I've now read George's contribution which addresses a number of issues I'd not thought of...
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
Certainly not as Greer would describe feminism.
Well, Bart, I suspect Germaine would not have described me as feminist either, back in the day. Because to be frank, I never gave things like equality of the sexes a thought. I had three brothers, and I took no shit from any of them.
I'm not sure I would be described even now as feminist either. In the end the label doesn't really matter. Beauty is as beauty does.
-
Jacqui Dunn, in reply to
We agree. :)
And - Paul "thanks Megan, I found your meta-critique helpful"
+1 -
Now, I support the aspirations of Maori people towards changing society in this direction, but wouldn't dream of identifying as Maori.
But you could say you support Tino Rangatiratanga which, unless I'm mistaken, is the equivalent to "feminism' in your example.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
I identify as a man, of the straight white middle-class variety
Which would make me very suspicious indeed if you started identifying with working class or racial minority struggles. You should feel free to support them, but actually vying to occupy those subject positions, boy, I would find that very problematic. And I think feminism is not just subscription to a series of sociopolitical goals - it's also about identity. Identity politics isn't an unhelpful label for me.
But you could say you support Tino Rangatiratanga which, unless I'm mistaken, is the equivalent to "feminism' in your example.
But again supporting it and being a part of it - two different things.
-
As a result I see feminists pushing for what is obviously an imbalanced position
O RLY?
-
Count me in the "I support feminism, not sure if I can call myself one" camp.
For the reasons cited by George and Gio, but also because ... which feminism?
I found the recent post by Maia on The Hand Mirror -- which some of us have been discussing elsewhere -- somewhat disturbing. It was replete with feminist language, but really, it was more an act of bullying dressed up with some doctrinal bamboozling. The way women in the comments who suggested as much -- and these are sufficiently serious women to have identified with a feminist collective -- were rounded on was depressing.
I'm also aware that women I know and love have been treated similarly in the past -- or, at the least, been patronised into the ground by their ideological betters. And I think, I don't want no part of that feminism.
My $0.05 worth.
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
But for me, having men say they support feminism and feminists has none of the costs and almost all of the benefits.
I nodded so vigorously at this point that I put my neck out. THE TRUTH, IT HURTS!
-
giovanni tiso, in reply to
The way women in the comments who suggested as much -- and these are sufficiently serious women to have identified with a feminist collective -- were rounded on was depressing.
You want to count yourself lucky you're not the guy who has to walk down the road and tell the lovely Emma(*) that what she does is "absolutely the opposite of everything that feminism stands for".
(*) Not our Emma.
-
I suspect Germaine would not have described me as feminist either, back in the day.
That's okay, I didn't agree with Greer when she said, quite recently:
Well, if he thinks that women are not interested in genital encounters with total strangers then he is absolutely right... What women yearn for is intimacy.
Now, this'd probably be an example of a use of "women" like Megan was talking about above, but if you're one of the individual women who never seem to be included when people are talking about "women"... it all gets a bit depressing.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.