Can a man be a feminist?

[Nigel]

Equal rights For Fat Ugly Women

If I become a feminist can I be completely neurotic once a month and blame it on natures natural cycle and skank money off of anyone I go out with or try to get off with???

 

[Darios]

Why should feminists concern themselves with men's issues? The world is already geared towards men's issues, why should feminists take them on board except where they affect women's liberation?

No, the world is already geared towards power hierachies that favour men. This isn't the same as men's issues now is it?

If sexism towards men is not treated in the same way as sexism towards women (irrespective if whether there is more prevalent sexism towards women) then the net result is, to paraphrase, that 'everyone is equal, but some people are more equal than others'.

 

[wtfftw]

Another question I want to throw into the discussion:

How many published feminists take on board men's issues and sexism towards men as issues deserving of treatment? So far I've encountered only two - Anne Dickson and Wendy McElroy.

I meet a lot of self-proclaimed feminists who are hypocrites in this regard. I'd certainly like to encounter more feminists who regard sexism as an issue for both genders rather than something that exclusively affects women.

Something for you to read.

 

[Darios]

Great article, thanks Dragon. That's given me some more links and people to read.

Here is a link in return.

 

[zion]

People always cite Andrea Dworkin (who is dead anyway) as a representative of feminist thought. I think both that people misrepresent her writings and that they then misapply that caricature to all feminists.

I don't think you can be a feminist and also consider discrimination against men to be as prevalent as discrimination against women. Sure, when it happens, it's a serious matter, but it's much rarer than the pervasive discrimination against women in most societies on Earth.

Neither do I see feminism as focusing on equality of outcome as opposed to equality of opportunity. I have never come across a feminist who defines feminism as being successful when each woman has exactly as much money as each man. Feminism is about the freedom to chart your own course in life, not a requirement to achieve only as much as the man next to you.

Aldebaran,

Personally I consider it an indisputable fact that "feminism" as it developped itself into portraying men as born monsters and women as their born victims made a caricature of the real gender-related problems in societies. One particularly bad and even very cruel effect is that of the "new role model" pushed onto women: The false idea that women *have* to compete with men on every level (mostly in the field of study and career-building) of what is or was considered "male territory".

The definitions of what is and is not proper "male territory" and "female territory" are not necessarily based in biology, but in cultural preconceptions. In my family, my wife has a traditionally "male" job (business school professor) and I have a traditionally "female" job (I work for an anti-poverty charity). She has a Ph.D, and I'm quite happy with a master's degree. She handles the finances because she's better at that; I cook and garden because I'm better at those. I do things requiring heavy lifting, because that's biologically based. Nothing about this arrangement seems particularly unnatural to us or to violate our respective biologies. Time was in England when women couldn't become lawyers or doctors or join any of the professions: what a waste of their talents that was!

When it comes to having children, I am not as knowledgeable because we are only just about to have our first child. But it has always been clear to me, for the twelve years we have been together, that I would want to be the primary caregiver for any putative child in its early years, and if that means that the child gets bottle-fed a bit more and breast-fed a bit less, then I'm OK with that. I would much prefer my wife to continue to work full-time and be happy in that, than to be at home with the baby and feel miserable. And if you're a woman that prefers being at home with the baby to being at work, then that's fine also - each to their own.

 

[Darios]

People always cite Andrea Dworkin (who is dead anyway) as a representative of feminist thought. I think both that people misrepresent her writings and that they then misapply that caricature to all feminists.

I wasn't citing Dworkin as a representative of feminist thought. I was citing her as one of the 'all men are monsters' mould. I think there's only so many ways to 'misrepresent' her 'all sex is rape' charge. I thought she'd been misrepresented at first so I listened to an interview with her. It is (was) her position. I'll send you the file if you want to hear it for yourself.

I don't think you can be a feminist and also consider discrimination against men to be as prevalent as discrimination against women. Sure, when it happens, it's a serious matter, but it's much rarer than the pervasive discrimination against women in most societies on Earth.

The problem with sexism towards men is that while less prevalent (in some respects) it is (or rather, has become) relatively invisible. One of the original charges laid by feminists against patriarchal thinking was that sexism towards women was effectively 'invisible'. I would contend that what makes sexism towards men particularly insidious is that while sexism towards women has been widely acknowledged (even if only limited progress has been made in tackling it), sexism towards men remains largely off the radar (often with the compliance of men themselves as noted in the article Dragon posted above).

Neither do I see feminism as focusing on equality of outcome as opposed to equality of opportunity. I have never come across a feminist who defines feminism as being successful when each woman has exactly as much money as each man. Feminism is about the freedom to chart your own course in life, not a requirement to achieve only as much as the man next to you.

Not sure if this was directed at me. Nothing there I disagree with.

 

[Thora]

The problem with sexism towards men is that while less prevalent (in some respects) it is (or rather, has become) relatively invisible. One of the original charges laid by feminists against patriarchal thinking was that sexism towards women was effectively 'invisible'. I would contend that what makes sexism towards men particularly insidious is that while sexism towards women has been widely acknowledged (even if only limited progress has been made in tackling it), sexism towards men remains largely off the radar (often with the compliance of men themselves as noted in the article Dragon posted above).

What has this to do with feminism though? Feminism is about women

 

[Darios]

What has this to do with feminism though? Feminism is about women

Read the article that Dragon posted

 

[Thora]

I have. And yes, I agree with the author that PHMT. But feminism is specifically concerned with women's liberation - it does not need to focus on improving the lives of men in order to be valid.

 

[zion]

From Wikipedia's article on Dworkin:

Dworkin argued that depictions of intercourse in mainstream art and culture consistently emphasized heterosexual intercourse as the only kind of "real" sex, portrayed intercourse in violent or invasive terms, portrayed the violence or invasiveness as central to its eroticism, and often united it with male contempt for, revulsion towards, or even murder of, the "carnal" woman. She argued that this kind of depiction enforced a male-centric and coercive view of sexuality, and that, when the cultural attitudes combine with the material conditions of women's lives in a sexist society, the experience of heterosexual intercourse itself becomes a central part of men's subordination of women, experienced as a form of "occupation" that is nevertheless expected to be pleasurable for women and to define their very status as women. Such descriptions are often cited by Dworkin's critics, interpreting (sometimes even falsely quoting) the book as claiming that "All heterosexual intercourse is rape," or more generally that the anatomical features of sexual intercourse make it intrinsically harmful to women's equality. Dworkin rejected that interpretation of her argument, stating in a later interview that "I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive equality," and suggesting that the misunderstanding came about because of the very sexual ideology she was criticizing.

Anyone who has read a romance novel will know what Dworkin is trying to get at here: the idealization of the passive, virginal woman as the only acceptable woman, and the way that that image feeds into real men and women's feelings and thoughts about what constitutes a proper heterosexual relationship. A little more sophisticated than what you were saying.

Of course both sexes stereotype about one another and can do so in unjust ways, just as people of different races do. However, refusing to discuss the oppression of women unless the oppression of men is also discussed makes the implicit suggestion that we should invest as much as a society in remedying the oppression of men as in remedying the oppression of women, and that there is nothing in the structure of our society that would make one of those types of oppression much more likely and much more common.

 

[voiceofreason]

This is a pretty weird thread. People seem to have some very mixed up ideas of what feminism is.

Feminism, as it's traditionally understood, involves support for women's rights, including equal treatment under the law, equal opportunity, an end to male oppression inside and outside the home, support for women who are victims of male violence and male oppression, and standing up against the sexism and objectification of women which is so rampant in our society.

All of these are things that men can and do support. Since the 19th century feminist principles have been widely espoused within the socialist movement and many men who maybe think of themselves as socialists are also feminists. Many men such as Keir Hardie actively supported the suffragette movment. More recently many men have joined demonstrations in support of abortion rights.

The term pro-feminist is redundant. If you're a pro-feminist then you're a feminist. I suppose you could say that men can't be radical feminists though they may support the aims and activities of radical feminists. Radical feminism was (and I think it's fair to use the past tense here, though the ideas have not died) a self limiting movement whose exclusionary attitudes toward men brought the word "feminism" into popular disrepute and though no doubt it did wonders for some women's lives it generally hampered the development of a mass movement for women's liberation.

 

[laptop]

Ah, new poster called "voiceofreason"... expectations lived down to

Doesn't understand the historical difference betwen radical and separatist feminism. Few of my separatist feminist friends - yes, life is contradictory - would have described themselves as "radical feminists" and radical feminists did not see it as entailing separatism.

That's a history lesson, for you, boy - for you are a boy, are you not?

Attempting to define prescriptively (rather than describe from experience) what feminism is, is a male trait, after all... and part of the problem.

 

[audiotech]

Someone once said that in order to change society men need to see the world through the eyes of women.

 

[Ing_soc]

Attempting to define prescriptively (rather than describe from experience) what feminism is, is a male trait, after all... and part of the problem.

altho ur right about not prescribing from outside experience i resent THAT