Should feminism's name be changed so that it supports both men and women rights, rather than just women's rights?

Asked by: 7isme
  • Nowadays it's tipping the scale towards women

    Not to say that equality of the genders has been 100% completed, however, women still pull the underdog card as a good excuse to go against what men were lifted up upon in the past. If you only focus on one gender, there won't be a balance. Needless to say, there are also men's rights issues, and it would be illogical to call that Feminism if your focusing on those problems.

  • Fair is fair

    Equal is equal. There should be no discrimination based on race or gender. Unequal is unequal. Girls should be considered same as boys and blacks the same as whites. Affirmative action was needed to right years of complete inequality but now equaliy should rule the day. No quotas or preferences. Severe consequences for discrimination

  • You just dont get it.

    The movement is about gender equality for all genders yes but it has the name feminism because women are the ones who have suffered the most from gender inequality and need the most activism.
    I find a lot of people who want to keep the movement about equality but change the name dont really care much about gender isses they just want women to stop complaining and its obnoxious. Why is it so hard to acknowledge that the movemnt is focused on womem being treated equally to men right now because thats the issue at hand at the moment?

  • I believe that would be Humanism.

    Although I disagree with the bias within feminism, changing it would be redundant, as it would only become what Humanism already is. There are arguments that feminism encompasses global equality, but that simply is not true. Feminism is focused on women's rights, by definition, that is it. Personally, I believe feminism should be abandoned altogether, as it only accomplishes further separation between the genders.

  • Like I said in my comment to stefy

    In the context of the United States, we should be moving along in the development of gender equality, towards a stance of true equality, and not of simply empowerment of women. That would mean dealing with social issues now, rather than legal issues, which should be addressed before proceeding with social issues and stigmas. In the United States paticuarly, some could say that gender equality isn't yet attained with the growing genderqueer community being constantly discriminated against both in legislation and society. So, in the United States, Gender Equalists should be focusing on:
    -Social equality for men and women
    -Legislative and Social equality for genderqueer persons
    -etc (more is sure to come if this idea we're to catch on)
    As it is, if you completed the first goal properly, then you've gotten half of the second goal done. All that's left of that would be legislation issues.

    Now, what would HAVE to happen before what I mentioned happened in the US or anywhere else in the world, would in fact involve feminism that would start with the empowerment of women and eventually (in theory) morph into gender equalism.

    So, in conclusion, some day it would be very nice to have gender equalism replace or feminism, and in the United States we are moving that way (ever so slowly), the reality is that before that can happen anywhere at all a majority of the world needs to have equal legislative rights for women and men and a moving idea of social equality.

  • Feminism specifically focuses on women's rights, and it needs to.

    There is no culture on the Earth in which the men are oppressed by the women. There are places like the US, UK, and Australia in which there are social stigmas against both men and women, but the legal rights remain equal.

    Everywhere else in the world, there are millions of women who are abused and then blamed for their abuse, denied education and jobs, and even considered property below male children. Feminism still has a purpose and it's near sighted to assume the work is done because we have succeeded in the places that affect ourselves.

    So why don't we call it a name that works on both gender's rights? Because there's already a word for that, called humanism. But rallying for men and women's rights in countries where men already have all the rights makes no sense. We have to focus on one issue at a time, and working on one group's issues doesn't imply we're advocating against all other's.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
freakazoid says2015-06-07T04:46:14.653
Mm hmm