Do You Have to be a Feminist to be Egalitarian?

[Costa Fierro]

So you're factually wrong.

No. I'm not wrong. Any feminist that outwardly questions some aspects of feminism isn't doing so because she disagrees with it, it's basically an elaborate form of trolling.

It's why New Edom's favourite feminist has that "Offend a College Student Day"; because she enjoys acting like a troll to overly offended babies.

[Neutraligon]

So you're factually wrong.

No. I'm not wrong. Any feminist that outwardly questions some aspects of feminism isn't doing so because she disagrees with it, it's basically an elaborate form of trolling.

It's why New Edom's favourite feminist has that "Offend a College Student Day"; because she enjoys acting like a troll to overly offended babies.

You telling me what my views are and calling me a troll is getting old.

[Hirota]

Yes, he did.

Your own Link shows the quote I linked to from Neutraligon mentioning Sarkessian.



Seriously, you really need to read.

[Costa Fierro]

No. I'm not wrong. Any feminist that outwardly questions some aspects of feminism isn't doing so because she disagrees with it, it's basically an elaborate form of trolling.

It's why New Edom's favourite feminist has that "Offend a College Student Day"; because she enjoys acting like a troll to overly offended babies.

You telling me what my views are and calling me a troll is getting old.

I didn't call you a troll. You're one of these feminists that agrees with pretty much whatever the mainstream puts out but doesn't openly admit it.

[Neutraligon]

You telling me what my views are and calling me a troll is getting old.

I didn't call you a troll. You're one of these feminists that agrees with pretty much whatever the mainstream puts out but doesn't openly admit it.

Yes you did since I have openly questioned certain feminist rhetoric and said I am a feminist. So not only have you told me what my position is (thank you for the continued strawman) you have also called me a troll. Maybe instead of telling feminists what our positions are and expecting us to defend the position you have assigned us you should actually listen to individual feminists when we tell you what our opinions are. You will have much more interesting debates that way and save a bundle on straw and construction costs.

[Lies and Ignorance]

You can be a feminist without being egalitarian. There are reactionary bourgeois strains of feminism that ignore the class struggle, and reduce women's struggle to liberal reformism. There are strains of feminism that use radical lexicon as a camouflage for insidious bigotry, against trans women, sex workers, and women of color. The measure of feminism is in its class component and its ability to account for contradictions among women. 'Egalitarianism' as an abstract principle is simply one of many feminist concerns, but hardly the end-all be-all.

[Costa Fierro]

Yes you did

No I didn't.

since I have openly questioned certain feminist rhetoric

No you haven't. You've explained (or justified) why certain people think certain things but nowhere have you actually critised feminist thought or rhetoric.

and said I am a feminist.

And nowhere did I say that all feminists are trolls. I said ones like Christina Hoff Summers who specifically go around intentionally aggravating other feminists to elicit reactions from them.

So not only have you told me what my position is (thank you for the continued strawman) you have also called be a troll.

I haven't called you a troll. For someone who loves strawmen, you seem to be quick to put words in my mouth.

[Neutraligon]

Yes you did

No I didn't.

since I have openly questioned certain feminist rhetoric

No you haven't. You've explained (or justified) why certain people think certain things but nowhere have you actually critised feminist thought or rhetoric.

and said I am a feminist.

And nowhere did I say that all feminists are trolls. I said ones like Christina Hoff Summers who specifically go around intentionally aggravating other feminists to elicit reactions from them.

So not only have you told me what my position is (thank you for the continued strawman) you have also called be a troll.

I haven't called you a troll. For someone who loves strawmen, you seem to be quick to put words in my mouth.

Ah so you haven't been reading my responses where I have stated my issues with certain feminist rhetoric, even when they where in this thread.
Here is one such post.

[Allanea]

Seriously, you really need to read.

And then New Edom responds, also mentioning her.

But the question stands.

New Edom, what do you define as 'feminism', and what do you view as the alternative to it what you wish to promote?

[Costa Fierro]

Ah so you haven't been reading my responses where I have stated my issues with certain feminist rhetoric, even when they where in this thread.

I can't read what isn't written.

[Neutraligon]

Ah so you haven't been reading my responses where I have stated my issues with certain feminist rhetoric, even when they where in this thread.

I can't read what isn't written.

viewtopic.php?p=29769695#p29769695
There you go. I have specifically said I disagree with the rhetoric and position of certain "mainstream" feminists.

[Community Values]

Seriously, you really need to read.

And then New Edom responds, also mentioning her.

But the question stands.

New Edom, what do you define as 'feminism', and what do you view as the alternative to it what you wish to promote?

I probably couldn't speak for him, but considering the thread name, I'd guess he's egalitarian.

[Ashmoria]

Yes, he did.

Umm, I brought her up first.

nevertheless he did seem to expand on the idea and might want to provide some background to (PLEASE not gamergate!) but the supposed feminism of sarkeesian.

[Aapje]

Surely being Egalitarian in the West would now be supporting multiculturalism

No, because multiculturalism tends to support non-egalitarian cultures.

[supporting] diversity

Yes, although not necessarily in the way that some people define diversity (one definition is 'non-white male') or in the way that some people define 'supporting' (one definition is discrimination to force a desired outcome).

gender equality (and not just of females, but of transgender people as well).

And of men. IMO, this is the part that tends to be missing from mainstream feminism and why I don't consider them egalitarian.

Although I support women becoming fully equal with men, I feel as though feminism is trying to make women more powerful than men.

That's because mainstream feminism denies (most of) the advantages of being female and (most of) the disadvantages of being male.

Traditional gender roles is like this:
- A boy has a candy bar and a cut on his arm
- A girl has a ice cream and a cut on her leg

Mainstream feminists only look at the ways in which the girl is disadvantaged compared to the boy. Thus they try to make them equal by taking half the candy bar from the boy and giving it to the girl; and putting a band aid on her cut leg.

The end result: The girl now has 3 times the amount of candy as the boy (the entire ice cream that she had before plus half of the boy's candy bar) and her wound is taken care of and his wound isn't.

We have made significant advances here in the UK, giving women the right to vote, and the law that women and men are to be paid the same salary. That I support, because it is only right and fair.

It is, although I feel that the feminist narrative is rather deceptive, as it is generally claimed or heavily implied that men always had the vote. In the UK, voting rights for all men were granted in 1918 (restricted voting rights were granted to women at that time too). Full suffrage for women was granted in 1928.

So the UK had centuries of women & (poor) men being disenfranchised, then 10 years of (poor/young) women being disenfranchised and then almost a century of full suffrage for both genders. In the feminist narrative, that 10 year period get cherry picked as if it was always like that, while it actually was the exception, rather than the rule.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Not everyone believes X.

Except feminists aren't known for having ideological diversity. It's always the same: misandry, misandry and yet more misandry.

Individual feminists do not hold the same idea of "feminism" as the group who you seem to believe are the set of all feminists.

You are speaking to a self-professed feminist who goes somewhat against the grain on some issues. And it's not me.

[Dameth]

I am an egalitarian anti-feminist.
So no.

/Thread.

[Community Values]

I am an egalitarian anti-feminist.
So no.

/Thread.

How can an ancom be egalitarian? /s

[Frenline Delpha]

You can be a feminist without being egalitarian. There are reactionary bourgeois strains of feminism that ignore the class struggle, and reduce women's struggle to liberal reformism. There are strains of feminism that use radical lexicon as a camouflage for insidious bigotry, against trans women, sex workers, and women of color. The measure of feminism is in its class component and its ability to account for contradictions among women. 'Egalitarianism' as an abstract principle is simply one of many feminist concerns, but hardly the end-all be-all.

Do you believe that any "strains" of feminism are insidiously biggotter towards men?

[Cannot think of a name]

You telling me what my views are and calling me a troll is getting old.

I didn't call you a troll. You're one of these feminists that agrees with pretty much whatever the mainstream puts out but doesn't openly admit it.

Ha.

[Dameth]

I am an egalitarian anti-feminist.
So no.

/Thread.

How can an ancom be egalitarian? /s

This comes with the package, friend. You have to subscribe to beliefs in various kind of equalities to be an ancom. Besides, a core belief of traditional anarchism is the lines of division and associations should be done on the ground of skill, merits and affinities, not race or gender.

Your question is rather vague but i'd be glad to answer it if you want to precise it a bit. I'm more used to wonder how can one be a traditional anarchist and not be an equalitarian - at least on some levels.

[Galloism]

I know I've asked this before, but I have yet to receive a satisfactory response.

If, at its core, feminism is about equality, why are there so many examples of many of the most powerful feminists exerting great pressure to prevent any accidental drift towards equality? They're not occasional aberrations. They're pretty fucking common.

Keep in mind: most of those on this forum have become antifeminist have become so not because they hate equality, but because they want equality and see modern feminism as an obstacle to that goal.

Like I said partially because they disagree with you on what is equality, as well as how to get there. For some, equality is getting back at men for centuries of being unequal. For others what they think of as equality is just not the same as what you (and many others) think is equality. Some actually believe that it is impossible for men to be the victim of rape by women, and some actually believe that any focus on men takes away from the attempt to bring equality to women. They see it as a 0 sum game.

Look, equality is equality is equality. I understand the distinction between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome, but as regards the rest, it is by definition antiequality.

For those who believe it is impossible for men to be the victim of rape by women (looking at you, Koss), that is per se an unequal position. It's a position that women are either by definition less capable than men, have less agency, etc, or by definition that men and only men are immune to rape. By very definition it is viewing the two sexes as inherently unequal, and therefore cannot be said in any way shape or form to be equality based.

Regarding the zero sum game part, this is not a drive towards equality either. Take rape, for instance. There is no reasonable basis that women are discriminated against, as a gender, when it comes to rape. We know, because we've studied this, that men and women are raped at approximately equal rates. We know, because it's obvious, that women who ARE raped are treated much much better by police and aurhorities than men are. I won't say it's ideal, but it's certainly better. There is absolutely no reasonable basis, at all, that women are treated badly regarding rape because of their gender. Now, rape victims are treated badly, and this should be fixed, but when it comes to gendered discrimination for rape victims, that faced by men is much much worse. If it's a zero sum game, they are attempting to focus their efforts on the privileged class. It's very much like the "white lives matter" people.

[Lies and Ignorance]

You can be a feminist without being egalitarian. There are reactionary bourgeois strains of feminism that ignore the class struggle, and reduce women's struggle to liberal reformism. There are strains of feminism that use radical lexicon as a camouflage for insidious bigotry, against trans women, sex workers, and women of color. The measure of feminism is in its class component and its ability to account for contradictions among women. 'Egalitarianism' as an abstract principle is simply one of many feminist concerns, but hardly the end-all be-all.

Do you believe that any "strains" of feminism are insidiously biggotter towards men?

No.

[Community Values]

How can an ancom be egalitarian? /s

This comes with the package, friend. You have to subscribe to beliefs in various kind of equalities to be an ancom. Besides, a core belief of traditional anarchism is the lines of division and associations should be done on the ground of skill, merits and affinities, not race or gender.

Your question is rather vague but i'd be glad to answer it if you want to precise it a bit. I'm more used to wonder how can one be a traditional anarchist and not be an equalitarian - at least on some levels.

The /s stood for sarcasm.

I wish there was just some kind of font.

[Dameth]

I wish there was just some kind of font.

...oh well then. Yes okay, makes sense now.

[Catochristoferson]

Ever since "manspreading" and "mansplaining" were added to the dictionary, I started to realise how toxic Feminism has become.