Feminism, misogyny and misandry.

[Unhealthy2]

How do we decide that gravitation is the force that attracts massive objects to each other? What if someone said that gravitation is defined as the stuff that comes out the back end of a cow? Would they necessarily be wrong?

Definitions can't be wrong. They can be non-standard, but they can't be incorrect.

[Dakini]

How do we decide that gravitation is the force that attracts massive objects to each other? What if someone said that gravitation is defined as the stuff that comes out the back end of a cow? Would they necessarily be wrong?

Definitions can't be wrong. They can be non-standard, but they can't be incorrect.

Great, so now all words are meaningless since every word can mean anything at all and we can just call the alternate definitions "non-standard".

Good job. Let's burn our dictionaries!

[The Norwegian Blue]

The thing with "no true Scotsman" is that it's only a fallacy when it's, you know, fallacious. It's not actually a fallacy to say, "Susan isn't a true Scotsman because she's not from Scotland, has no Scottish heritage or ancestry, and isn't a man."

The fallacy occurs when you invent your own defining quality, not when you use the actual dictionary definition of a word. It would be a "no true Scotsman" fallacy to say "this person who believes in the social, legal, and economic equality of the sexes but does not believe affirmative action is a good way to achieve that end is not a feminist." It very definitely is NOT a "no true Scotsman" fallacy to say "this person who does not believe in the social, legal, and economic equality of the sexes is not a feminist, because that's the goddamn definition of the word 'feminist'."

But how do we decide that belief in equality of the sexes is the correct definition of feminism? What if someone said that feminism is defined as the belief that pumpkins are evil? Why would they necessarily be wrong?

Why, because "wrong" is defined as "made of stinky cheese," and "cheese" is defined as "the square root of walrus," of course.

Either you work with the definitions of words as they exist, or you don't bother trying to have a discussion, since as long as we can redefine things at random, nothing we say means anything at all.

[Unhealthy2]

Great, so now all words are meaningless since every word can mean anything at all and we can just call the alternate definitions "non-standard".

Good job. Let's burn our dictionaries!

No, we just have to be careful to define all ambiguous terms whenever a discussion starts.

[Unhealthy2]

Why, because "wrong" is defined as "made of stinky cheese," and "cheese" is defined as "the square root of walrus," of course.

Either you work with the definitions of words as they exist, or you don't bother trying to have a discussion, since as long as we can redefine things at random, nothing we say means anything at all.

But is equality even the standard definition? I mean, definitions are essentially by consensus, and there really doesn't seem to be a large consensus on just what feminism is. It might be the plurality definition, but is it the majority?

[Dakini]

Great, so now all words are meaningless since every word can mean anything at all and we can just call the alternate definitions "non-standard".

Good job. Let's burn our dictionaries!

No, we just have to be careful to define all ambiguous terms whenever a discussion starts.

It's not ambiguous. It's been defined for quite some time (aka since approximately the late 1800s).

[Dakini]

Why, because "wrong" is defined as "made of stinky cheese," and "cheese" is defined as "the square root of walrus," of course.

Either you work with the definitions of words as they exist, or you don't bother trying to have a discussion, since as long as we can redefine things at random, nothing we say means anything at all.

But is equality even the standard definition? I mean, definitions are essentially by consensus, and there really doesn't seem to be a large consensus on just what feminism is. It might be the plurality definition, but is it the majority?

Yes! It is.

[Unhealthy2]

It's not ambiguous.

Then why are there so many disagreements about what groups are and aren't feminist? Are separatist feminists feminist?

[Kiskaanak]

Okay, but who takes them seriously?

No one. However, it can be very irritating to constantly hear someone being accused of misogyny.

Not possibly more irritating than people claiming to be accused constantly of misogyny in a stupid attempt to define feminism according to their own feverish persecution fantasies.

[Kiskaanak]

There are often debates about what is and isn't feminism. Many times examples of ridiculous statements coming from self-described feminists are dismissed as these people not being true Scotsmen, I mean feminists. This, of course, raises the question of who owns the term. Who gets to decide what feminism is and what it isn't? Who gets to decide who is and is not a feminist?

There are many feminisms. There are Marxist feminists, right wing feminists, sex-negative, sex-positive feminists, indigenous feminists, etc etc etc.

So no one gets to own the term.

Especially not people who have based their anti-feminism on a ridiculously caricature of a particular fringe group of separatists lesbian man-hating feminists, claiming that this represents all feminism.

[Unhealthy2]

Especially not people who have based their anti-feminism on a ridiculously caricature of a particular fringe group of separatists lesbian man-hating feminists, claiming that this represents all feminism.

I never said that separatists are all feminists. I simply remarked that it's not clear who gets to define feminism. Of course, it's easier to just pretend I said things I didn't, isn't it?

[Kiskaanak]

Especially not people who have based their anti-feminism on a ridiculously caricature of a particular fringe group of separatists lesbian man-hating feminists, claiming that this represents all feminism.

I never said that separatists are all feminists. I simply remarked that it's not clear who gets to define feminism. Of course, it's easier to just pretend I said things I didn't, isn't it?

I never said you said separatists are all feminists...but this huge fucking thread is chock full of people claiming that feminists are man-hating and/or supremists and/or whatever...all based on caricatures of feminism rather than any experience with real life feminists. I used your comment about defining feminism to address this.

So unknot thy panties from thy posterior.

[Unhealthy2]

So unknot thy panties from thy posterior.

No, I won't, because you're acting like it was unreasonable for me to assume that you were insinuating that. It was not unreasonable of me at all.

[Kiskaanak]

I'm all for women having the same rights as men I am just against other aspects such as saying that all people should be paid the same regardless of performance (and yes paying someone less due to their gender/other trait is wrong), or that we need to ensure that there is an even number of women and men on the board of directors for companies. Or that watching porn is being degrading to women and how some feminists believe it should be banned.

You said it yourself: "some feminists." I disagree with some environmentalists about the proper way to reduce oil and coal consumption in the US - that doesn't mean I'm not an environmentalist, it just means there is reasonable room for debate about things like the role of nuclear power plants in 21st century America. From everything you're saying, you're a feminist, you just don't agree with every other feminist on how to solve every issue - which would be impossible, anyway, since there's nothing remotely approaching a consensus on many of those issues. If you agree that women should not be discriminated against in job hiring, but don't think quotas are a good way to reduce discrimination, you're a feminist (and furthermore, you're in line with the majority of feminists on that issue).

Quoted for Unhealthy2. So many of these questions have already been addressed in this thread.

[Kiskaanak]

So unknot thy panties from thy posterior.

No, I won't, because you're acting like it was unreasonable for me to assume that you were insinuating that. It was not unreasonable of me at all.

I don't take you as seriously as you take yourself.

[Unhealthy2]

I don't take you as seriously as you take yourself.

Clever. You find that in a fortune cookie or the back of a cereal box?

[Lauchlin]

The word "feminism" isn't ambiguous. Foolish people attack a caricature of feminism because they are threatened by the concept, but can't in good conscience argue against equality.

Stupid 16 year olds posting in this thread do it because they see stupid 60 year old pundits on TV do it and get away with it. It doesn't make it any less absurd.

[Unhealthy2]

The word "feminism" isn't ambiguous. Foolish people attack a caricature of feminism because they are threatened by the concept, but can't in good conscience argue against equality.

I'm not against equality, nor am I against many forms of feminism.

Stupid 16 year olds posting in this thread do it because they see stupid 60 year old pundits on TV do it and get away with it. It doesn't make it any less absurd.

I'm a 21 year old college student.

[The Deep Vault]

First link: Broken.

Well, that's annoying...

Second Link: Neither graph disproves the gender pay gap....

Actually... It's a lot less than 33%, as you can see, for egalitarian men and women. Meaning it might not just be gender.

Third Link: Well, you said it.

[/quote]

I said it was biased, not that the bias was correct.

[Lauchlin]

The word "feminism" isn't ambiguous. Foolish people attack a caricature of feminism because they are threatened by the concept, but can't in good conscience argue against equality.

I'm not against equality, nor am I against many forms of feminism.

Stupid 16 year olds posting in this thread do it because they see stupid 60 year old pundits on TV do it and get away with it. It doesn't make it any less absurd.

I'm a 21 year old college student.

I was explaining why you are confused and think the word is ambiguous. People who dislike the concept are confusing you.

You can call Obama a Nazi all you want, and even personally redefine Nazi so that it makes sense, but Obama is still not a Nazi to anyone who thinks that words have meaning.

[New Imperial Clans]

But is equality even the standard definition? I mean, definitions are essentially by consensus, and there really doesn't seem to be a large consensus on just what feminism is. It might be the plurality definition, but is it the majority?

UT, your field benefits greatly from a rigorous precision of language, and in turn that field benefits the world. I get why you so emphatically value careful definitions.

As you know, mathematical induction means something and plays a role in some kinds of proof, whereas in some branches of philosophy, induction means something difference and provides only inference (is that right?)

In other fields, induction means yet other things. And that's a term that lends itself to far more precision.

Feminism, or any -ism, is going to be used as a word by many people across different professions in backgrounds. Some are going to take it to mean equality, some are going to use it as if it means "ugly spiteful lesbian". We consider who is using it and why to figure out what they're trying to convey.

I get why that isn't ideal, and leads to confusion. However, feminism as a pursuit of equality is a sizable and identifiable meaning in terms of the majority of users in reasonable public discourse. It makes for a useful default definition, and there is some consensus on it.

[Ryadn]

Really? I blame sexist people a lot more than I blame feminists.

I don't think that anything like this really should differentiate a male from a female. Men should be allowed to show emotion and be sensitive, to diet, to care about how they look, to wear dresses et c without being looked at as "less" of a man. Women should be allowed to be tough, (physically) strong and athletic, not shave their legs, go into maths et c without being "less" of a woman.

The only thing that "should" differentiate men from women is that men have penises and women have vaginas (along with all the other secondary sex characteristics and the point where women can get pregnant and men can't).

We agree that there shouldn't be these locked in roles like men can't cry and women have to shave their pits. I'm with you.

BUT. I hate the idea that the only meaningful difference between me and a guy is that he has different genitals. That's stupid and it cheapens the value of being female. That's exactly what I'm talking about when I talk about women trying to act like men and trying to get men to be more like women. It's a hidden form of sexism that's accepted because it defies tradition.

I'm not saying we should enforce stereotypes. Please don't get me wrong. What I'm saying is that if women are, on average, physically less able than men to lift 100lbs, then so what? If men, on average, keep their emotions themselves more than the average woman does, so what? It's not like society is the source of this. It's in the genes. It's a consequence of having different sets of chromosomes. I'm perfectly fine with it.

My mom and dad raised me to love and accept who I am but also encouraged me to explore my options. I hate wearing skirts and dresses so I don't. At the same time, I love to watch romantic movies ("chick flicks") and I don't get offended when my male friends tease me about it. I don't resent guys for being bigger than me and I don't expect them to pretend to be anything they're not, just like I won't.

Your unsupported assumption in bold is what annoys and worries me.

[The Parkus Empire]

I like how there's an ad for a social network exclusively for women; because that's what feminists really want, right?

[Ryadn]

It isn't about men acting like women or women acting like men. It's about individuals acting in the manner that feels most comfortable to them without having to worry about whether or not it matches their genitalia or gender.

If a man being able to be a lot like you, only with a penis, "cheapens the value of being female" for you, that's your problem, not his.

Wow so are you one of those people who would like to erase femininity and masculinity? Make us all the same but only half of us pee standing up?

Why are you so threatened by the idea of being judged on your individuality, instead of how well you fill your 'role'?

[Ryadn]

I think the hate of everything feminist stems from the fact that some people assume that feminists are men-hating dykes who can be cured of their bitchiness by being laid.

Worked for me.

>>

<<

(kidding)

But, honestly, I think that most men who don't like feminists don't because they don't like to hear women talk about things other than what to make for dinner.

Actually, they don't like feminists because they're sick of being blamed for all the problems in the world.

Have we already placed wagers on whether or not OrangeCats is a man trolling? I'm late to the party, I know.