Are Feminists Sexist?

[Ostroeuropa]

Some do. A lot don't realize the actual problem. Check my posts.

Er, wait... what's the "actual problem"?

Gender inequality and gender roles assigning people rights and duties based on their genitals.
It isn't a womens rights problem.

[San Leggera]

I was under the assumption that the OP was referring to feminists as a group rather than individuals.
Of course there are sexist people in the world, however feminism is not sexist; at least not on its own.

The term is sexist.
And the implications of using THAT term to describe THOSE goals is sexist.

Tunnel vision is sexist now?

[Meryuma]

Shouldn't feminists, if they truly want to exist in a just and equal society, acknowledge that women are not the only people who have been abused in the name of civilization?

They do. In feminist theory, it's called intersectionality.

Feminism is inherently sexist. Not to say it hasn't (and isn't) doing some great things as to improving conditions for women. It is flawed from the outset, and thus never able to truly achieve it's goal (that is, equality), by favouring the social development of women over that of men.

Equality by improving social conditions for women and men should be our modus operandi.

Feminism focuses on women because women are more oppressed. That doesn't mean sexism doesn't hurt men as well.

[Risottia]

I googled the word "Feminism" and learned that it is a term coined in 1895 which was intended to describe...
1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests
However if you read history you will find that there have been many queens and women of high status in almost every society. Are we then to believe that being an Empress in ancient China meant you were less equal to a male slave?

History and logic aren't exactly your strongest subjects I guess.

Shouldn't feminists, if they truly want to exist in a just and equal society, acknowledge that women are not the only people who have been abused in the name of civilization?

The vast majority of us do.

Then again, you will find idiotic suprematists in about every human group.

[Ostroeuropa]

The term is sexist.
And the implications of using THAT term to describe THOSE goals is sexist.

Tunnel vision is sexist now?

If the goals are gender equality, labeling the movement something that puts emphasis on women implies that women are the ones with less rights and they need to be raised to the level of men.
That isn't the case.
Feminism has done extremely little for mens rights, so it ISNT a movement that has any trackrecord on gender equality, just giving women rights that men also hold, while keeping womens rights constant, and eliminating womens duties, while keeping mens constant.

[Impius Gentes]

The feminists I've met are, well,...

I could describe them with the following joke way to well:
"Feminism is the belief that both sexes should be equal by solely focusing on one of them."

[Indira]

Some are, some aren't. I'd like to think the majority fit the latter category

[Giovenith]

They can be. That doesn't mean that they all are.

[Ashlak]

Feminism is inherently sexist. Not to say it hasn't (and isn't) doing some great things as to improving conditions for women. It is flawed from the outset, and thus never able to truly achieve it's goal (that is, equality), by favouring the social development of women over that of men.

Equality by improving social conditions for women and men should be our modus operandi.

Essentially this.
Because the term places emphasis on women

Yes, just like the ebil gay rights movement, for putting emphasis on gays!

Of course it's going to put emphasis on women, it's about women's rights. Women having rights and such won't mean that men will lose rights. There are even some feminists who pay attention to some men's issues, like the fact that Female on Male abuse is reported less than Male on Female abuse.

[Ostroeuropa]

Essentially this.
Because the term places emphasis on women

Yes, just like the ebil gay rights movement, for putting emphasis on gays!

Of course it's going to put emphasis on women, it's about women's rights. Women having rights and such won't mean that men will lose rights. There are even some feminists who pay attention to some men's issues, like the fact that Female on Male abuse is unreported.

1. We do not force women to be parents. We do force men.
2. "Women and children first."
3. A loooot of societal pressure is on men to be the provider/head of the house etc.

When women fought for the right not to be forced to be parents, they completely ignored the fact we force men to be parents with child support etc.

Second, gay rights isn't analagous because they actually ARE being given less rights than straight people, women weren't given less rights and duties. They were given different rights and duties.
And it isn't about women's rights, it CLAIMS to be about gender equality, so you are wrong.

[TheKanadianFederation]

I don't know who said it, but they were right when they said that Feminism is the beliefs that we can solve the ills of humanity by focusing only on the issues of half of us...

[Olthar]

Are Feminists Sexist?

Only the sexist ones.

[Norsklow]

Essentially this.
Because the term places emphasis on women

Yes, just like the ebil gay rights movement, for putting emphasis on gays!

Of course it's going to put emphasis on women, it's about women's rights. Women having rights and such won't mean that men will lose rights. There are even some feminists who pay attention to some men's issues, like the fact that Female on Male abuse is reported less than Male on Female abuse.

Exactly how is that different from White Anglo-Saxons putting an emphasis on White Anglo-Saxons
or Socialist Workers putting an emphasis on Socialist Workers?

EVERY form of Identity Politics is ab ovo unacceptable.

[Densaner]

I googled the word "Feminism" and learned that it is a term coined in 1895 which was intended to describe...

1: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

However if you read history you will find that there have been many queens and women of high status in almost every society. Are we then to believe that being an Empress in ancient China meant you were less equal to a male slave?

Shouldn't feminists, if they truly want to exist in a just and equal society, acknowledge that women are not the only people who have been abused in the name of civilization?

Good post. I believe certain feminists are just interested in women having rights. However some others are men haters. I've read a number of articles recently written by feminists that could be bracketed under "The End of Men" and there is even a best selling book with that title! Many feminists would agree with the old quote - "A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle"

[Ostroeuropa]

These days it's pretty hard, thanks to the feminist movement, to be a sexist without at least realizing you are.
UNLESS
you are sexist against men. Then it's far, far too common and unrecognized.


Ask yourself, if FEMINISM were really about gender equality, instead of women's rights, why would they call it feminism?
I'd argue that you can be in favour of gender equality, or you can be a feminist. You can't really be both, and Feminism has done it's damndest to pretend you can.

So i'll alter that.
ALL feminists are sexist.
BUT not all people who claim to be feminist realize what it is they are actually claiming and are gender equalists, not feminists, or are ignorant of their sexism against men.

[Seriong]

Feminists are not inherently sexist.
Are there sexist feminists? Yes.
Are there non-sexist feminists, who join the group, for the benefits of a well-known name, with a desire for equality? Yes
Are all feminists sexist? No.
Are there sexist MRAs? Yes
Are all MRAs sexist? No


You cannot judge a group like this, you can judge people, who are members of the groups, but not the groups.

[Christian Democrats]

More than a few of today's feminazis are biased against men.

[Steel Confessors]

I myself am against all kinds of Feminism. Frankly because of this simple logic.

There are three distant levels of feminism. The first is radical feminism. These are the advocates of silly beliefs such as 'men can not be raped'. Or perhaps they believe all men support rape and the so called 'rape culture'. These people believe in a truly oppressive patriarchy which is less supported than the worst conspiracy theories. I barely need to go into the damage these views have and the high level of intellectual dishonesty that occurs at the hands of these people. It's important to not that these are the most vocal of the feminist movement, these people have the greatest voice and are literally a threat against basic cognitive functions - such as critical thinking. They ignore evidence at whim and believe the louder they shout, and the more insults they throw, the righter they are.

The second level is moderate feminism. These are people who identify as feminists but have some rationality. They don't hold particularly extreme views and often a decent debate can be hold without childish tactics. I am against this group because it still believe in the patriarchy (the keystone of feminist theory), a society ruled by men. If the patriarchy existed, then why do men get such a bad deal in child custody, why do men get so much worse sentences in prison? Why does men cancer research receive so much less funding than women's? A patriarchy, oppressing women (or more moderately, favoring men) is evidently false.

The third level, is the mythical feminist. This is a MRA term to describe a feminist who is completely rational, logical and doesn't believe in a patriarchy. She accepts and perhaps even fights for MRA issues and equally fights for women issues which even MRA cannot deny are not there (Planned Parenthood problems, abortion clinic protests etc (the entire of Islam) ). I guess I'm not truly 'against' this type in the same way as the first 2, however I still greatly dislike how they label themselves as a feminist. I do not identify solely as an MRA, I identify as an egalitarian who's desire for equality encompasses both men and women problems. As such, a 'mythical feminist' who really is nothing more than an egalitarian that should not identify themselves with such a one-sided, irrational group.

There is no maleism. There are only men's rights advocate. (egalitarian)
There is feminism and as a result there are substantially less female rights advocates. (egalitarian)
I'm against feminism because on all levels I find it evidently detrimental to the way we think or at the very least, misleading. The willful ignorance of feminism towards MRAs makes it truly a poison ideology.

[Silent Majority]

Shouldn't feminists, if they truly want to exist in a just and equal society, acknowledge that women are not the only people who have been abused in the name of civilization?

We do. Which is why Feminist is almost never someone's sole political/philosophical discriptor.

[Harkonna]

Feminism has been permeated by misandry since the early 1900s, and since about then, has been focused on trivial nonsense, while deliberately sabotaging any attempt to focus on the rights of men. It has popularized the abuse and assault of men in the public square, and demonized the idea of doing the same to a woman. It silences any discourse with the label of 'misogynist,' while upholding the ideas and doctrine of known, hateful misandrists. It has been utterly blind to the plight of those who are far more oppressed than women in western societies, instead furthering the idea of 'rape culture' in which all men are to be considered potential rapists.

It has even gone as far as to label women who state that men's rights are as valid as women's rights as 'gender traitors.'

I would say that this is all sounding all too familiar. Supplant a few religious terms here and there and there you go. It's a doctrine worthy of gracing the pages of a religious text.

Honestly, it'd be better if we focused on humanism than feminism. Address actual problems, and balance out the focus of societal support, for both men and women- and drop this offensive nonsense that women are made of fucking spun glass.

So, in my opinion at least, I would consider feminist ideology to be inherently sexist. Even if a fair chunk of its adherents are not.

[Wolny Kraj]

In theory, they are somewhat sexist, it could be argued, because they're only fighting for women, but that's not exactly a sexism that's harmful or hateful so I don't consider that to be sexism. However, they are CERTAINLY capable of it. I'm a big proponent of the men's rights movement and also for women's rights, but I have to say, there's no group I've ever come across that's had the capacity for hate as much as radical feminism. I don't wish to sully an entire group's name, but the radicals of feminism can be extremely hateful and extremely sexist.

[Ostroeuropa]

Feminism has been permeated by misandry since the early 1900s, and since about then, has been focused on trivial nonsense, while deliberately sabotaging any attempt to focus on the rights of men. It has popularized the abuse and assault of men in the public square, and demonized the idea of doing the same to a woman. It silences any discourse with the label of 'misogynist,' while upholding the ideas and doctrine of known, hateful misandrists. It has been utterly blind to the plight of those who are far more oppressed than women in western societies, instead furthering the idea of 'rape culture' in which all men are to be considered potential rapists.

Honestly, it'd be better if we focused on humanism than feminism. Address actual problems, and balance out the focus of societal support, for both men and women- and drop this offensive nonsense that women are made of fucking spun glass.

That's the other thing.
Feminism as a movement has been incredibly unwilling to address the BENEFITS sexism offers women.

[Ashlak]

Yes, just like the ebil gay rights movement, for putting emphasis on gays!

Of course it's going to put emphasis on women, it's about women's rights. Women having rights and such won't mean that men will lose rights. There are even some feminists who pay attention to some men's issues, like the fact that Female on Male abuse is unreported.

1. We do not force women to be parents. We do force men.
2. "Women and children first."
3. A loooot of societal pressure is on men to be the provider/head of the house etc.

When women fought for the right not to be forced to be parents, they completely ignored the fact we force men to be parents with child support etc.

Second, gay rights isn't analagous because they actually ARE being given less rights than straight people, women weren't given less rights and duties. They were given different rights and duties.
And it isn't about women's rights, it CLAIMS to be about gender equality, so you are wrong.

1. Yes, we do. There's a lot of societal pressure for both genders to have kids in general.

2. Which is admittedly bullshit. I'm not claiming that men are not the victims of double standards, they certainly are.

3. Which is also bullshit. And there is a lot of pressure for women to be submissive housewives and not get to uppity. Gender roles are stupid.

And that's because of gender roles, something that a lot of feminists are against.

Wait a minute, women were never given less rights? You don't know shit about history, do you? And from your claims, you know even less about feminism. Have you even bothered to read about feminism. To at least skim a fucking wikipedia article at least?

Holy shit, so many people don't know anything about Feminism. They just hear vague claims that "ALL FEMINISTS ARE SEXIST AND HATE MEN HERP A DERP!" and then they repeat them, all the while never even bothering to actually read up on feminism.

[San Leggera]

So i'll alter that.
ALL feminists are sexist.
BUT not all people who claim to be feminist realize what it is they are actually claiming and are gender equalists, not feminists, or are ignorant of their sexism against men.

That's the problem. Feminism has been broadly defined as those for gender equality and people are taking to it as such.

[Ostroeuropa]

1. We do not force women to be parents. We do force men.
2. "Women and children first."
3. A loooot of societal pressure is on men to be the provider/head of the house etc.

When women fought for the right not to be forced to be parents, they completely ignored the fact we force men to be parents with child support etc.

Second, gay rights isn't analagous because they actually ARE being given less rights than straight people, women weren't given less rights and duties. They were given different rights and duties.
And it isn't about women's rights, it CLAIMS to be about gender equality, so you are wrong.

1. Yes, we do. There's a lot of societal pressure for both genders to have kids in general.

2. Which is admittedly bullshit. I'm not claiming that men are not the victims of double standards, they certainly are.

3. Which is also bullshit. And there is a lot of pressure for women to be submissive housewives and not get to uppity. Gender roles are stupid.

And that's because of gender roles, something that a lot of feminists are against.

Wait a minute, women were never given less rights? You don't know shit about history, do you? And from your claims, you know even less about feminism. Have you even bothered to read about feminism. To at least skim a fucking wikipedia article at least?

Holy shit, so many people don't know anything about Feminism. They just hear vague claims that "ALL FEMINISTS ARE SEXIST AND HATE MEN HERP A DERP!" and then they repeat them, all the while never even bothering to actually read up on feminism.

Women were never an expendable gender.
Thats a pretty big fucking right.
Yeh, i'd say they never had less rights. It was a balance of duties and rights.

And we don't LEGALLY FORCE women to be parents.