• True feminism will.

    I see so many arguments against feminism that are based off of a completely incorrect interpretation of it. The "radical feminist" types that appear in the arguments I've seen- they are NOT feminists. They are misandrist. The entire point of feminism is to, yes, preserve female rights, but in doing so, is attempting to tear down ideas that hurt men, too. They're trying to bring issues that affect all of us to light, not just female, not just male, but everybody. Rape, patriarchy, abuse, poisonous relationships, misandry, misogyny, all of it- true feminism is the idea that all persons are created equal, regardless of sex, gender, race, or sexuality. Honestly, I do not understand those who claim to support equal rights for all, yet hate feminism. The literal definition of feminism is, and I quote, "the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes ." All the sexes.

    So, I complete my stance with an example of why we need true feminism- Meninism. Someone literally made a joke account on Twitter, making fun of "men's rights advocates", and a hilarious amount of people actually took it seriously, creating a "movement", which consisted of whining about the upcoming all-female redo of Ghostbusters, Yes, I am serious, That was what they were concerned about. Not the issues like poisonous ideas that men have to be strong, can't be weak, or that being feminine automatically equals weak, or male abuse that isn't handled seriously due to the above statement, or that many just assume men don't get raped, which hurts so many survivors... And the list goes on. The reason I bring "meninism" up as a point is the simple truth that feminism already addresses all of those issues. All of them. So next time you go around ragging on feminism because it is only defending women, is lying, wrong, or misandrist in general- remember that true feminism, not misandry, is for the protection and the rights of all.

  • Feminism can save lives across the globe.

    It's easy to think feminism is unnecessary in first world countries because we rarely experience oppression of rights and when we do, it happens to both males and females. But in most countries and cultures it's the men who rule, often at the risk of the lives of females and their children. Rape victims are blamed for their abuse, children are married to old men, female infanticide is still rampant, and they're denied education and work that females have been proven to be capable of. It does not matter if men and women are actually equal in every way, but every human deserves the same rights no matter what.

  • I think it's obvious

    The definition of feminism is literally: "the advocacy of women's rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes." So if you support equality of the sexes you are by definition a feminist weather you recognise the label or not. So unless feminism is shut down it will by definition lead to equality. Also it is perhaps the greatest 'idea' in solving bigger issues issues outside of women rights such as poverty because there is only one known cure to poverty and it can be phased very simply, it's called the 'empowerment of women'.

    Posted by: hect
  • It's a step

    Women needed something to rally towards, as all people do when an idea is taking shape, and the beginning of talks turn to action. Sadly, in this world silence does beget consent. So, what did many do when they wanted more? They rose up to their male counterparts and began to ask the right questions. Why aren't they getting paid the same? Why are't they allowed to work certain jobs? Why can't they have more?

    It forced us to introspect as a society. What kind of people do we want to be? Is equality a virtue we value?

    Feminism isn't going to do it alone. No one group will be able to. It'll take time, suffering, cooperation, experimentation, and endurance before we get there. I think it's worth it.

    Will feminism lead to equality? As a cobble stone upon many toward that promised land.

    (pseudo-religious undertones: red flag I know, but the simile bears the message well I think) ^^ (Also I have that tune stuck in my head.) Come and go with me to that land. Come and go with me to that land. Come and go with me to that land.... Where I'm bound.

  • No. . .

    The great majority of feminist only focus on attributes of first world nations even though women already have equal rights. There is still minor general inequality in first world nations but woman are the feminist only concern. A lot of feminist advocate equal pay for woman for the same job with the same amount of qualification even though there are already laws in place penalizing that. The feminist who advocate woman's rights in third world country are dealing with an actual problem and are a lot less petty than their first world feminist counterparts but are dealing with the situation in a very inefficient manner. Wouldn't it be more efficient to develop the third world nations as a whole and fix all inequalities not just genderal ones. My point is, if you develop an area in all aspect [ exp: find food/water source, install a democracy/rid it of political corruption] the gender equalities will probably end. Other than this and the annoyance of the Because I am a Girl Foundation's over dramatic commercials [over dramatic as in they can't just ask you to be a decent human being and ask you to donate, they tell you that by empowering woman you are lifting entire villages out of poverty when actually it is vice-versa] third world feminist are doing [or at least trying to do] noble work but are so focused in on one detail that they miss the big picture.

  • Look at the word itself

    The word is "Feminism" so clearly even Feminists are in favor of women and have a secret hatred towards the male race, even if they claim to want equality. There are men's rights issues too, the whole idea of Feminism is stupid, if you're trying to make a more equality society, why create a whole organization that leans towards a gender? I'm sorry, but it's not balanced, I'm not against Feminist ideas, just what it has become.

  • There's no need for feminism.

    1. Radical feminism has hijacked feminism altogether making feminism all about making woman better then men. This in turn makes feminism a movement against make individuals.
    2. Feminism is not needed
    Men and woman already have complete equal rights, any argument against that is false. People who say they don't will bring of a wag age difference but don't account the reasons for thag being time taking off, part time jobs, etc.
    3. It's sexist
    If you want to promote equal rights then why not become a humanist? It is completely irrational to say you support equal rights yet be a feminist, just be a damn humanist. Support the rights of all humans.

  • Particularly considering the pseudo-intellectualism of college feminists/ gender studies grads...

    The movement itself is full of prominent members who feel justified in literal man hate, painting men as an oppressor class. Default sexist, among many other things. If you start with the assumption that one side of the group is, by default, flawed and dysfunctional, default tainted, you cannot reach an equal ground.

    In addition, considering that most so-called feminists ascribe to ideas grounded in socialism, which has yet to successfully function in any society, and generally leads to massive class conflict, how can it reach a goal of equality?

    Not to mention the fact that I seldom run into a reasonable feminist. Instead, they bring out one sided non-arguments like the wage gap, and shame women for not making the choices they approve of.

  • Feminist "Equality" in action: Millions spent to protect girls from the word "bossy" while 77% of American baby boys receive forced foreskin removal.

    Feminism is a movement, not an outcome. Feminism does not equal equality, and to assume that this irrational, momentum filled, group-think driven movement will lead to equality is absurd.

    The feminist movement is dynamic and subject to whatever group think grows within it -- and the soil itself has a gender bias.

    If "Feminism" is really meant to symbolize equality, you have to overcome cognitive dissonance. People naturally mistrust the counterintuitive, and we are right to. This is the ultimate example of bad design and doomed branding if it's to represent equality.

    The word is loaded with symbolism 1000 times more powerful than any dictionary definition. The "good" (feminism) is gendered female. The "evil" (patriarchy) is gendered male. Like a call to arms, the word itself encourages the enrollment of polarizing, biased thinkers… Including toxic thinkers.

    These extremists within feminism influence the actions of the movement as a whole, so it's not on an unbiased path toward equality. It will go wherever its members take it. Or, like a river flows, it will take its members wherever it wants to naturally go.

    Anyone who claims rationality and self-critique will prevail over group-think in a passionate, momentum-filled movement like feminism, is ignoring history and psychology.

    If it had a more neutral name, it would attract more balanced, rational, egalitarian thinkers -- and more diversity. Feminism is extraordinarily one-sided in its membership (the political left) and its activities (always prioritizing women's issues... Except where Islamism is concerned).

    One of the great hypocrisies of modern western feminism: It unwittingly tolerates and even supports Islamism (militant, political Islam). In the words of former Islamist Maajid Nawaz, who's still a Muslim, Islamism is not the religion of Islam that most Muslims practice peacefully, but the political agenda of those who want Sharia Law in government.

    By permitting neighborhoods in European cities to become thriving, growing enclaves of Sharia Law, third-wave feminism is a threat to itself.

    Sadly, rather than acknowledge this threat, third-wave feminists are more likely to label the messenger as a "problematic" "Islamophobe". It doesn't matter that many Muslims openly condemn Islamism. Most feminists will tolerate it because for some twisted reason, they'd rather support those who wish to oppress them than be perceived as politically incorrect by their progressive peers.

    By placing political correctness over pragmatism, feminism fails to look objectively at the world and has completely irrational priorities -- if its goal is equality.

  • Hypocrisy comes to mind.

    Feminism only focusses on women's right and issues they feel where they have less rights. It may have started out with good intentions, however, it's now been hijacked by man-haters. Those that say it's just a minority that are as such are merely fooling themselves. Just look at website like Jezebel. The level of hypocrisy further deepens when the moderate feminists state they don't want to be judged along with the extreme ones, yet in other aspects of society we do just that. Perfect examples of this are with men's rights group and muslims.

  • Focusing on benefiting one group at the expense of everyone else isn't really the way to go...

    Feminism is largely an ideology built around shrieking about perceived injustices with some McCarthyism built in for good measure. For example, there was this scientist working on some Rosetta project. He showed up to some big event in this Hawaiian shirt with naked women on it. The feminists decried him as some evil being, did this massive witch-hunt on him, and tried to get him censured. After a solid week of this, he broke down and apologized. This was considered a major victory by the feminist ringleaders. It's times like that when you realize that there's something very wrong here.
    How do you spell 'toxic'? (M-A-G-E-N-T-A!)
    So, no, feminism as it is now will not lead to equality. A feminism that says 'You are fellow and equal people' would have my respect, and would, in fact lead to equality if not for one detail: under the law, men and women are to be treated equally.

  • My opinion is it won't.

    Feminism, in my opinion, is a flawed ideology, because it blindly supports all supposed female inequalities, yet often fails to fact-check these claims and often fact-checking for oneself incurs the wrath of many involved in the movement. Also, all major actions of the movement ignore men in cases in which the issue is experienced by both genders in significant amounts, and members of the movement (e.G. In the Warren Farrell protest) become angered when anyone tries to combat issues that focus on males.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.