True, but there's not many people on this thread who aren't providing some evidence from their views either. Frankly, feminism as it exists is no different from any other political ideology. Some people are going to defend it to the hilt, most will find bits and bobs they like, others will denounce it as the antichrist. There's evidence to be found on all sides.
Feminism isn't all about scientific studies. That is one of the problems with this thread- as Johnno pointed out. It is, in it's many incarnations, a belief or myriad beliefs and ways of activism about women and their chieving equal rights in society - which as you point out takes many forms. For all the men wondering about why more women aren't participating on this thread, I am suggesting there may very well be other reasons than there just being more male members on MAP. Look back over some of the things said on this thread and then ask yourself again "why aren't more women participating?" If you (general you- not any one person) can't see it, well I am suggesting that may be part of the problem.
Maybe in some schools. I don't think that is the issue in my school though. My school is traditional, yet is pretty good at bridging the gap into Western society. There are no female Sifu's in the history of my school though. The Plum Blossom Federation we are a part of does have some though. Admittedly far less then men, but still enough that I think it is significant progress. (Sifu Jane Hallander, Sifu Jo Hardy, Sifu Evelina Lengyel, Tai Sifu Simona Fruscoloni are ones that come to my mind readily.) Is there something in our society where more men think it would be cool to teach MA's for a career? While women have other motivations with regards to MA's? Maybe, Even on this and other forums, the young aspiring instructors seem to almost always be men. I have no answer why. On a related note - Most of the male students at my school seem pretty cool about issues surrounding female MAists. I have known a few men who didn't want female instructors. Their loss as we have some excellent ones at my school - mine being one of them. I have known one woman who changed instructors to a female one solely because of gender too. Which I found equally dumb. She had some IMO weird idea that it was disrespectful to her husband when he was out on long term military ship duty to have a male instructor. How it was disrespectful, I have no idea. She wasn't able to explain it when I asked - just said it was. I have seen a few men who have to get over issues of hitting women in sparring. I don't really hold that against them as our society DOES really ingrain this into a lot of men. It just takes them awhile to understand that mutually agreed sparring is not the same thing as hauling off and abusing a woman.
I get that, but it being a belief system doesn't make me less inclined to think it's fair game for criticism. All political views have some form of belief system in them somewhere and they're all fair game. But seriously, how many women are frequent posters outside of specific art forums? You're honestly the only one I can think of these days. Even if it is the case they haven't posted because the thread's been critical of feminism I'm fine with that. Seen a lot of threads criticising things where only one side is represented. Feminism doesn't get a pass on that because it's feminism. And, personally, if there are people who didn't get involved in this because it was critical then that's their problem. It's a thread on map. No one is going to face any consequences for being in a minority opinion and they'd have been better off trying to make a case for themselves than being quiet.
It isn't because the thread has had criticisms of feminism. You are missing the point. It is the nature of some of the arguments. You have a thread of overwhelmingly male people with some tearing apart a movement entirely. And you don't see the irony of that? That some of the attitudes here express just why feminism is still needed? For example: people bring up female ritual circumcision and the men here complain that women focus on that and don't work on male circumcision issues. There have been several issues like that on here. Men who want to turn the focus on them and their issues. Instead of getting up of their computer chairs and doing something themselves on their near and dear issues, they are going to complain about a women's movement not doing it for them instead of letting them choose their own issues in their own movement? Really? (And for those of you thinking it is the same issue, you really need to read up on what happens to women and how it happens.) Women haven't even had basic rights- like voting or being in the job force the way we have been until relatively recently in history. But men here complaining that we focus on other issues besides men not getting equal rights in custody battles. Again, not saying it doesn't have validity as an issue, but to criticize women for not doing more for men.......yeah, ironic and missing the point. Women have not been treated equally in the world for most of human history. And still aren't in many parts of it. There are countries where women are being treated very poorly - not allowed an education or to drive or far worse (like having non medical people crudely destroy their genitals or families doing honor killings of women). We get together to deal with our issues and empower ourselves and you have men here complaining we don't focus on men enough? Or men here arguing about video games like THAT is a major concern of feminism? Pages of studies this and that about video games? I am going to go out on a limb and ask you all to go ask the women in your lives to list their issues about women in the world and see if any of them list video game treatment in the top five. Again, yes, it is AN issue- but the proportion of how it was treated here compared to other issues really makes me think some here are missing the point. Also, it isn't a political forum, so maybe you aren't attracting the sort of women who want to debate things as mentioned above. I for one just found some of the arguments so annoying I just didn't want to bother. Because it isn't a fun thing to debate. But this thread has just reiterated to me the basic need for feminism. Even though I myself am very critical of many feminist leaders in America Today. But I support the basic concept of feminism.
This thread is waaaay too long for me to be bothered to go back and check right now, but what I remember of that discussion yes, that was brought up. But I also remember the majority of men posting making the point that two aren't comparable. I also remember debating with someone whether male circumcision was a problem in the first place. The topic kind of took on a small life of its own and turned into a general chat about circumcision iirc, not about feminism's role in it as such. At least the bits I remember posting about. But as I say, long thread. I may well be wrong. See this is an interesting one. Because its a valid defence to say men complaining about feminism not addressing men's issues is weird. But on the flipside you also have a lot of feminists (and the majority coming fomr that side on here) saying feminism is about sexual equality, not strictly women's rights exclusively. Feminism can't have it both ways. Its also important because certain things are treated as feminist issues when they aren't. Domestic abuse will continually be one I bring up for this. It is a very common feminist issue and I am so used to seeing men shouted at for bringing it up as a male issue when feminists talk about it. Its not a gernder exclusive one. Men bringing it up in feminism is absolutely fine because its incredibly blinkered to treat it as a women's rights issue and not a general society one. Not even going to touch complaining men aren't getting out of their computer chairs to make changes instead of complaining about it online. You want to talk about an internet heavy clicktivist movement, there isn't a bigger one right now than feminism. Seen far more flame wars and pointless controversy bollocks over perceived feminist issues than any other. Ehhhh, I dunno. Sloth actually dragged up some very interesting stat about voting which I'll try and find if you want them. Point being the perception seems to be male suffrage was a thing way before women when really, if you take the actual population eligible to vote, they were fairly even in when they became universal in the grand scheme of things. But even so, yes women's rights are a newer thing. I think I'd be right in saying mine is probably the first generation where women are growing up on an even footing with the most freedom they've ever had to pursue what they want without a bunch of dumb societal expectations and views on genders. However, that to me is the point. Those rights are a thing now. The fact women had to fight for universal suffrage relatively recently doesn't matter in the modern movement anymore because that fights been won. Weirdly the fact women being in the job force being new isn't widely accepted as a reason why they're not represented at the top end of business though. Of course. And a very frequent accusation levelled at feminists today is that their time would be much better spent worrying about those women. Men don't say "screw the FGM and forced underage marriage in the 3rd world issues, I want paternity leave" they say "well if you have time to throw a hissy fit over a t-shirt, maybe you have time now to consider this." Couple reasons. 1. Few of the people most involved in this thread are into gaming, and it is a HUGE issue in the videogame industry right now. Which when you consider its the largest entertainment medium on the planet, isn't a total non-issue. 2. Its gaining a lot of attention. The discussion I've seen hasn't been about games much per se, but about Anita Sarkeesian. The reason for that is because she has become a widely known figure to the point of appearing on general news media to discuss her work. But she's also controversial as some of her work is questionable to say the least. In the most vocal/visual form of feminism at the moment, that being the twitter/tumblr/reddit type, she is a very big figure. 3. Also worth discussing since that vocal group, the ones being very dumb, are the ones who are damaging feminism's image and support. When you have a large number of polls of women saying they support women's rights but aren't feminist, they're probably the reason why. in which case there not being women talking about it isn't anyone's fault. No its not, and I'm not sure how many people have actually enjoyed this thread. Its simply people who feel strongly about it and, right opinions or not, they're completely in the right for feeling that way. My exposure to feminism for a long time was having a lot of accusations levelled at me because of my gender while hypocritically being told sexism is bad. I'm not surprised there will be people posting on here who you feel have the wrong idea about feminism. If there is even such a thing as correct view of such a splintered group. So do most people. I don't think I've seen anybody on here (maybe one?) say anything against female rights as a concept. They've criticised specific parts of the feminist movement and questioned whether a lot of feminist doctrine has merit (which I will hold as being a perfectly fine thing to question) and whether the movement is focusing on things it doesn't need to (wage gap for example) but I don't think anyone has questioned the idea of women's rights as a whole. Which basically means no one has questioned feminism using the definition you seem to be using for it. They've only challenged certain facets and movements of it. But at the end of the day, if you and other women refuse to engage in the discussions, then don't be surprised they're male dominated. If you feel like people are saying things that are wrong and don't want to challenge them on it and start a discussion then cool, feel free, but then also don't be surprised they continue saying those thing. You went the way of criticising men complaining about male issues for not getting off their arses and doing something. Well I'd say the same thing back at you and feminism as a whole when it comes to complaining about the men involved in the discussion. At least they're involved in it. Refusing to do so yourself isn't going to achieve anything. Refusing to express your views and then complaining your views aren't the ones being expressed is just weird to me.
aaradia, I find it hard not to agree with every word you have put in the postings above. More power to you. When men can expend as much effort as shown on this thread (in an opinion which seems somewhat critical of women's efforts to empower themselves), then I think you have it correct - it is proof positive that some positive efforts on this front are still much needed. I work in a sector that is very much male dominated - we have some focussed meetings to encourage and empower women to break the glass ceilings which seem imposed upon them. Political correctness means women can no longer be ignored in Western societies, but unfortunately this is not true everywhere particularly in more poverty stricken nations of the world, where society, religion and male empowered lives have for generations quashed womens' rights. Even in our own western societies women still suffer the attitudes of generations of male focussed industries and viewpoints only enabling women the lowest of positions and education. I'm sorry to those men in this thread that may have taken the right' stance, but I can still see the irony in a bunch of men feeling that they have to discuss 'feminism' almost as though they perceive it as something wrong and almost a conspiracy against men. If you are all taking the attitude that feminism is a good thing then fine, but I just don't perceive 100% across the board support which is a shame (it didn't take 90 pages to all agree that it was a good thing surely?). Yes, there may be similar issues within the male community, i.e. circumcision, but on the whole women have things much worse than men in many situations and the suppression women is endemic across many cultures and civilisations. People might well argue 'the Prime Directive (non interference) applies', but, in my opinion, this doesn't make it right and if it takes women working for women to raise the profile of such things then I say more power to them.
I think that's flawed logic which is, sadly, often used by advocates of present day feminism. The argument that "the number of people criticising our position shows just how necessary our position is" falls over because it doesn't differentiate between being criticised because people are prejudiced against you and being criticised because your position is wrong. Really? That's an absurd position to take. The differences are a matter of extent rather than category. Female and male circumcision are exactly comparable as ritual infant genital mutilation for socio-religious reasons. The only difference is that the version of female circumcision involving extreme excision of tissue is more common in a limited number of cultures whereas the male version involving less excision of tissue is overwhelmingly more common in a wider number of cultures. There is no categorical difference between the two rituals. Female circumcision is simply more of a focus because it causes more long-term damage, tends to be done under riskier conditions and only risks offending a small community of North African people who hold little political influence in the West, so it's a bit of no-brainer to try and stop that one first. However, to say that the two are non-comparable seems bizarre to me.
I am care more that my wife, close friends and family who are female are treated equally, then I do about how someone who shares the same gender as me feels about his masculinity being taken away.
Because it is and has been for almost 170 years - there is no problem. Not much, which should tell pro-feminists something about how bad of a state of intellectual bankruptcy and credibility ideological feminism has fallen into. From Obama using debunked feminist claims on gender pay gap or campus sexual assaults at the state of the Union address to presidential candidates making those topics part of their platforms, it is. What are men supposed to do when modern feminism blames them for all the ills of the world because, hey, penis, and builds its bogus claims on fallacies, manipulated numbers, moral fervor and misinformation? Huge, no, but it is a movement nonetheless, and a movement witn enough pull to influence the decisions made in Washington. Proof that being a woman doe not make one more qualified than a man to accurately and objectively tackle the subject.
My understanding is that the damage it causes isn't equal although that admittedly could be because I got that from a show specifically about FGM. But to me there's also the difference in how, as I understand it, they're broadly carried out where male is largely done at birth and female at puberty which gets rid of the whole 'babies can't remember jack' aspect. Don't get me wrong, I'd happily see both gone tomorrow and the issue of which one is worse is actually something I don't care about. I don't like either and I'd rather look at it from that angle than spend constructive time in a ****ing match over which is worse and more "worthy" of attention. Much the same as the men v women issues in feminism debates actually. So much time and energy spent arguing the toss about who has it worse instead of saying "well both suck, so lets do something about it"
To add to Greg's post and reiterate something that's been mentioned multiple times in this thread: "feminism" and "women's rights" are not synonymous. Feminism is a movement focused on women's rights yes, but on general usage they're not the same thing to be used interchangeably. Feminism as described by both the dictionary and, for what its worth, the stuff I studied in college, only covers the movement, not the supporting of equality in general.
Who started the criticisms of people actually doing something about an issue here? Who started the "you need to be doing this because it is what I believe?" Who started the "men have it just as bad" part of the debate here? Hint - not the feminists. My point being that we each get to decide how to spend our own time and efforts if we get involved in any cause. If I personally decide FGM (or any issue) is an issue I want to get involved in, I think someone else telling me what is more important and what I should do with my time, effort, money, etc. is ridiculous. You think my time and effort should be done differently? It really is none of your business. I won't tell you what to do with your efforts. Yet there has been repeated criticism on here of feminism for not focusing on men's issues. If something is important enough for anyone to get involved in solving the issue- good for them. I have no patience for those not involved telling others what to do with their time and effort. There are so many issues in the world, one can't be involved in all of them- racism, sexism, homophobia, the environment, poverty- the list goes on and on. I wouldn't criticize someone involved in any racial minority activist group that their group is faulty because they don't also put their time and effort into LGBT issues. It is a hard thing to take said time and maybe money and be an activist. It is very easy to sit back and tell others what they should or shouldn't be doing instead of getting up and putting effort into that which is near and dear to you.
But I don't get how you can hold that view and then complain about men choosing to spend their time promoting similar male issues. And to a large extent this comes about because of feminists making claims that feminism is about gender equality generally and not exclusively women's rights. Further to that, my problem with it is that, as I say, a ton of time gets spent arguing about who has it worse and whether one or the other is more worthy of dealing with when they're the same issue. Look at domestic abuse. Its brought up constantly as a womens issue (and it is an area I feel its justifiable to point out the problems with protesting it as such. If you want to focus more on women then cool, but its generally done in a way that makes it seem female exclusive when that is far, far, from the case) which is damaging to the male case as it reinforces the perception its not gender neutral, and it just makes things harder. My issue with looking at things as gender specific isn't that you ignore one side (although if you're pushing a bunch of bollocks by saying its one sided that's another thing) but you're hamstringing yourself for no good reason. You'd have better results quicker if you made it a society wide thing. As I lover horrible analogies, it would be like instead of promoting gay rights you promoted only male gay rights and completely ignored lesbian rights. If that was possible somehow. I don't think we would have had anywhere near as much success with gay rights if that was the case as a giant chunk of the people involved, well, wouldn't be. If you can make an issue gender neutral and combine the different movements and activists under one banner I have no idea why you wouldn't want to.
Uh, because I haven't complained about men choosing to spend their time promoting male issues. I have complained about men complaining about women (or anyone really) and how they choose to focus their efforts. I have no problem with men focusing on custody issues for them or circumcision- good for them. And I will and do support both causes. Straw man argument there. I personally believe feminism is about women raising themselves to equality where they fall behind men. And here is another example of a man saying "but what about us?" Are you really trying to claim that men get abused by women on anywhere close to the same scale as women getting abused by men? Again, not saying it isn't an issue at all, but considering the rate of women being abused, yeah- it bugs me that women trying to take care of women being abused becomes a criticism because we don't focus on men enough. Again, if you want to take the approach of dealing with some issue under one banner, go ahead and start a movement doing that. I will support you BTW. But I won't support criticizing women who are doing anything to better the world because they don't involve men as much as men want them too. For all its flaws, women are in a much better place in parts of the world BECAUSE of feminists. And I think that is a good thing.
Aaradia, you speak almost with own voice. If feminism wasn't need I can't see that a 'movement' would have developed (which it clearly has) or that senior politicians would be taking so much notice of it. Yes, there are some issues common to both sexes and for those men involved they obviously have my support. However, you can't treat all issues equally when in many cases they are VERY unequal and in most cases very biased against women. Sometimes positive discrimination IS necessary to bring a situation back onto a fair footing. History is awash with evidence of women's repression in countless ways and if the feminism movement is raising these issues to the point where they hit someones polotical agenda then this can only be good. Who knows it might even solve a few men's problems as long the way too, but at least men aren't sold into marriage at the age of 11 or denied schooling in most cultures that I know about. Women are not yet equals in many societies - even our own and they should be.
No, because there isn't any of argumentative relevance. Most women do not identify as feminists. Would the same arguments presented here by men have carried more weight if they had been formulated by women? Would the debate have been non-ironic enough? One does not need to be a woman to be able to formulate cogent arguments against feminism, nor does being a woman make one automatically qualified to talk about it. That's the second special pleading fallacy in one page - both of them women, so there you go. That point has been made indeed but it was, in the grand scheme of the arguments given, a footnote claim. Turning up after 90 pages and lamenting that it's been a major talking point is simply fallacious and a mischaracterization of the thread as a whole. And speaking of irony, irony is - ironically - why that argument is brought up: When a movement claims to stand for gender equality but only cares to tackle the issues met by only half of the gender spectrum (and in the case of modern feminism, I'm using the word "issues" quite lightly), I'd say it has a major credibility problem on its hands right off the bat. Just stick to the term "women's rights". That would at least be more accurate label than "gender equality". Most people have not been treated equally for most of human history, regardless of gender. Major enough for Anita Sarkeesian, feminist extraordinaire, to launch a crowd funded project about it and collect $400K; so it seems to me than addressing this specific complaint to her would be energy better spent. I reckon she is the one missing the point.
That is a very fair point That is part of the problem though is that there's a lot of "feminism to me is..." I really think it needs to be broken down into some more cohesive parts. Not going to happen and I wouldn't know where to begin, but I think it would help. Yes actually, I am. http://www.mankind.org.uk/pdfs/30 Key Facts - Male Victims (April 2015).pdf http://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence http://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/pn.42.15.0031a (I stole all of those off Sloth. Look at me crediting sources. College wasn't a waste after all! :hat Its not equal, but it is in no way negligible and nowhere near as rare as people seem to think. As far as anecdotal evidence goes, I've seen plenty of women crack men. It simply doesn't chime as domestic abuse to most people. And that's limiting it purely to physical. Sure, but you can't deny that if you did magically combine all of them they'd probably have more success? Whether people want to, personal choice to promote causes yadayadayada aside, wouldn't it objectively be more likely to achieve the goals everyone wants if it had combined resources and manpower? And in other parts of the world men are hounded over t shirts and someone says saying women have neater handwriting is patriarchal submission. All of these things come under the heading of feminism. I have a feeling the latter are the ones men complain about far more than the former ones you're talking about.
Well, you know what they say about statistics.............. No I am not going to get into a "my statistical study vs yours" battle on here. I could- I did a quick search and found plenty to bolster my view. Others here can google for themselves to see. It rather boggles my mind that men really believe they are victims of domestic violence on the same scale as women are and have been. But you are free to believe what you want. The very fact that you believe this actually bolsters what I have been saying the last several pages. I rather suspected some men on here would be resistant to what I am saying. I offered my perspective. And I note several of the few other women on here get exactly what I am saying. And no women have disagreed. For the men that support feminism- it is a welcome thing! For those that don't- it will persist regardless of what you think.
