The NationStates Feminist Thread

[Ostroeuropa]

If you think i've broken the rules, go report it. Don't post about it to me. As far as i'm aware, topic rules aren't a thing. Further, "All these feminists who" disqualifies it from an "All these feminists are." it's specifically referencing a subset.

You've told me to report you before. And when I did, you claimed I was using the mods as a weapon to silence your speech. So just to be sure: do you REALLY want me to take this to Moderation, or are you just dodging me here?

Because you were using the mods as a weapon to silence my speech.
I don't care if you take it to moderation. They'll tell you the same thing I have.
I think you're only bringing this up because you're trying to get me to shut up. It isn't going to work.
The mods are usually pretty clear about this by the way. If you think i've broken the rules, don't tell me about it. Go tell them.
Telling me about it gives the impression that you're trying to use them as a weapon, made even more egregious by the fact that you're doing it despite no rules violation. I don't think it's provable though, and comes down to interpretation on the part of the person you're doing it to. Worse, it leads to a threadjack and derails the discussion. You'd think this would be fairly obvious.
So yeh. If you think people are breaking rules, don't talk to them about it. Go report it.

[Aelex]

Go read up on the definition of feminism. You'll be surprised.

There is sadly a huge difference between the definition and the actual feminist movement in the western world.

[Ostroeuropa]

Go read up on the definition of feminism. You'll be surprised.

There is sadly a huge difference between the definition and the actual feminist movement in the western world.

There isn't really. Tahars been over it. It's just that many feminists don't understand the definition.

[Chessmistress]

I would argue that it's the result of those feminists who keep saying feminism is addressing mens issues too. They should cut that shit out.

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

[Wallenburg]

Wow, Ostro. You accuse me of using the mods of a weapon and viciously suppressing your speech, and of threadjacking the conversation. Then you threaten me with mod action and continue said "threadjack". You cannot be argued with. I'm leaving.

[Ostroeuropa]

I would argue that it's the result of those feminists who keep saying feminism is addressing mens issues too. They should cut that shit out.

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

Well, if more feminists would do as you are and stop pretending to be about mens issues to, thus preventing any progress on those issues, the Mens rights movement would probably back off on it's anti-feminism stuff. It's fueled purely from a desire to work on mens issues, and the recognition that "Feminism is that too!" is preventing it.

[Aelex]

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

What's with this idiotic optimism? I have already made this parallel but
damn it's exactly what did the bolshevik in 1917! "We over-throwed the capitalistic system so now everything will be fine and all problems will resolve all by themselves!" No. Just no. You can't just put your fingers in your ears and scream "lalalala" hoping that everything will be ok once you basically destroyed the very fundation of our society.
So, either you admit that over-throwing the "patriarchy" is in no way the last step of your program and give us solutions to what do AFTER or you simply stop with using this argument of "male problem will go away once the feminist will have taken over".

[Chessmistress]

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

Well, if more feminists would do as you are and stop pretending to be about mens issues to, thus preventing any progress on those issues, the Mens rights movement would probably back off on it's anti-feminism stuff. It's fueled purely from a desire to work on mens issues, and the recognition that "Feminism is that too!" is preventing it.

See? It's really funny that a Radical Feminist and an MRA can agree on something. But it's not weird, it's just a matter of honesty, and I think that such honesty is very important: more and more true equality will be approached, more and more males who are losing their privileges will suffer. I don't think it's honest saying them "we care of you too" then doing absolutely nothing about it - and of course it would be ludicrous a women's rights movement taking care about males' issues, that would be really a waste of resources in our perspective.

Edit: I just voted on the Telegraph pagea: men should have their society, not being part of Fem Soc. 1029 votes, 94% people agree with a Radical Feminist thought.
These guys at Durham seems good guys, and even Fem Soc are great

“None of the Fem Soc's remit has anything to do with men’s issues. It doesn’t come on to their radar.”

• Men need to open up about depression, not man up

Despite Adam making a powerfully eloquent and heartfelt case for a standalone men’s group, on Thursday, Durham University’s Societies Committee rejected his plea, telling him he could only operate from within the Feminist Society.
“Fem Soc have been great, and have offered to work with me, but I don’t think that’s satisfactory, as they don’t have men’s issues as a pressing goal,” he says. “That’s fair enough – so why can’t I set up a men’s group?
“To be clear, I’m not interested in waging ideological war against feminism and want to distance myself from those MRAs and misogynists who seem to spend a disproportionate amount of time bashing feminism. I want to help men. Instead of just bitching about stuff on the internet I want to get into activism.

[Ostroeuropa]

Well, if more feminists would do as you are and stop pretending to be about mens issues to, thus preventing any progress on those issues, the Mens rights movement would probably back off on it's anti-feminism stuff. It's fueled purely from a desire to work on mens issues, and the recognition that "Feminism is that too!" is preventing it.

See? It's really funny that a Radical Feminist and an MRA can agree on something. But it's not weird, it's just a matter of honesty, and I think that such honesty is very important: more and more true equality will be approached, more and more males who are losing their privileges will suffer. I don't think it's honest saying them "we care of you too" then doing absolutely nothing about it - and of course it would be ludicrous a women's rights movement taking care about males' issues, that would be really a waste of resources in our perspective.

You'd find that the MRM consensus is usually in favor of womens liberation too. It just isn't their area of activism.

[Chessmistress]

You'd find that the MRM consensus is usually in favor of womens liberation too. It just isn't their area of activism.

It shouldn't be their area of activism, exactly as men's rights is not mine.

[Chessmistress]

Go read up on the definition of feminism. You'll be surprised.

There is sadly a huge difference between the definition and the actual feminist movement in the western world.

That's due there's around a definition "feminism is for gender equality" that is also exact: since women have it worse (on the whole) the final goal of feminism is really gender equality. But that doesn't means to keep care of men's issues.
But to better understand what feminism do, our OP definition is far better: "the advocacy of women's rights and women's empowerment on the grounds of equality to males".
I want also point out that "cultural feminism" is not feminism at all: it's the belief that women are better than men, because according "cultural feminism" we are supposed to be nurturing and peaceful - it's not true

“Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human. ” ― Robin Morgan

[Aelex]

Simone de Beauvoir once sayed that "On ne nait pas femme, on le devient" and she was right. I think that the only ground on which there is still really progress which can be mad and who legitimate the existence of feminism in the western world is education and that feminist should concentrate on it rather than on pointless fights.

[Des-Bal]

Simone de Beauvoir once sayed that "On ne nait pas femme, on le devient" and she was right. I think that the only ground on which there is still really progress which can be mad and who legitimate the existence of feminism in the western world is education and that feminist should concentrate on it rather than on pointless fights.

Men have less education than women in most of the western world and it's getting worse. It's also an issue that can be attributed almost entirely to bias.

[Des-Bal]

That's due there's around a definition "feminism is for gender equality" that is also exact: since women have it worse (on the whole) the final goal of feminism is really gender equality. But that doesn't means to keep care of men's issues.
But to better understand what feminism do, our OP definition is far better: "the advocacy of women's rights and women's empowerment on the grounds of equality to males".
I want also point out that "cultural feminism" is not feminism at all: it's the belief that women are better than men, because according "cultural feminism" we are supposed to be nurturing and peaceful - it's not true

“Women are not inherently passive or peaceful. We're not inherently anything but human. ” ― Robin Morgan

Feminism is not about equality. If it was then feminist's would stop at parity and that's not the case.

[Geilinor]

I would argue that it's the result of those feminists who keep saying feminism is addressing mens issues too. They should cut that shit out.

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

This is the problem. Some feminists say that men should go as far as to call themselves feminists, other feminists completely oppose it. I'd like an answer - what should I, a man, do to support non-radical, non-TERF feminists?

[Glorious KASSRD]

I would argue that it's the result of those feminists who keep saying feminism is addressing mens issues too. They should cut that shit out.

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

Can I ask what evidence you have that men's problems will go away with "the patriarchy"?

[Diopolis]

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

This is the problem. Some feminists say that men should go as far as to call themselves feminists, other feminists completely oppose it. I'd like an answer - what should I, a man, do to support non-radical, non-TERF feminists?

I'm rather wary of calling myself a male feminist, both because of the implications of it(ie pinko) in many minds and because I don't want to get into the whole "can men be feminists" fight. So I am a male ally of new feminism.

[New Edom]

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

This is the problem. Some feminists say that men should go as far as to call themselves feminists, other feminists completely oppose it. I'd like an answer - what should I, a man, do to support non-radical, non-TERF feminists?

There's no real Nicene Creed for feminism. Feminist groups often contradict one another, and it's worse in a way now that it's become popular in some circles.

I would say it's important to not accept the pop feminist party line of "If you believe in equality between men and women, congratulations, you're a feminist." Support equality, sure, but on terms you find acceptable. I'd make it equivalent to being able to be charitable without belonging to a religion or concerned with social justice without following a particular political ideology.

[Luminesa]

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

This is the problem. Some feminists say that men should go as far as to call themselves feminists, other feminists completely oppose it. I'd like an answer - what should I, a man, do to support non-radical, non-TERF feminists?

I'm a girl, and I don't call myself a feminist. I don't label myself that way, because then it's too political of a term.

To support non-radical feminists? Well...look at one of the most legit modern feminists ever!

"The duty of every man is the dignity of every woman."-St. John Paul II

I dunno if you're Catholic or not, but I just felt like saying that. One of my favorite quotes about dudes ever.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Chessmistress is anything but a typical feminist. Or even a typical radical feminist. She does not speak for even 95% of us. Even I, as a radical feminist, almost never agree with her.

Question: do you agree there's patriarchy and male privilege?
Male privilege = women have it worse (on the whole) = feminism is needed.
Do you agree wiith that?

I don't know what is a "typical" feminist: there are too many kinds of feminism around the world.
For the standards of some European nations, yes, I'm a typical Radical Feminist.

I don't think I'm always right: this thread is meant to confronting different visions about how the goals of feminism (that are common to all kinds of feminism) should be pursued. If other feminists disagree with me, they should explain why, not being silent.

I do agree with that. I do think there are a few men's issues that need to be addressed as well, though, that are a result of the patriarchy. I don't agree with the "men can't be feminists" bullshit and some other stuff you say.

[Haktiva]

would feminists ever advocate for free sperm as part of medical insurance? You know, if a woman want to get pregnant or something.

[Aelex]

would feminists ever advocate for free sperm as part of medical insurance? You know, if a woman want to get pregnant or something.

Ain't that already free?

[The Alexanderians]

would feminists ever advocate for free sperm as part of medical insurance? You know, if a woman want to get pregnant or something.

Ain't that already free?

No it's not a medical necessity and because you can get it for free from other sources...

[Nazi Flower Power]

I would argue that it's the result of those feminists who keep saying feminism is addressing mens issues too. They should cut that shit out.

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

Workplace fatalities are like the "women make $0.77 for every $1 men make" statistic. A large part of the discrepancy is because men and women make different career choices.

And I disagree that men and women need separate rights movements.

[Nazi Flower Power]

I have to agree.
I have been accused to "throwing women under the bus" for saying men have it worse when it comes at suicides and deaths on workplace. Sometimes who negate that are the very same persons who say "we take care of males' issues too".
I'm honest: males' suicides and males' deaths on workplace are not my issue as feminist (again: check the definition), and I'm sure these issues will be fixed when the patriarchy will go away. Until then, males should deal with their issues: males, not feminists - males cannot be feminists, just only allies. And feminists should be alies of a non-misogynistic males' rights movement (sadly, it do not exists).

This is the problem. Some feminists say that men should go as far as to call themselves feminists, other feminists completely oppose it. I'd like an answer - what should I, a man, do to support non-radical, non-TERF feminists?

You can call yourself a feminist if you want. Some guys do, and it's not a problem.