https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Feminists and Anti-Feminists

I consider myself a feminist, in that I believe in equal legal and social treatment of women and men.  I don't believe all men are rapists (I'm pretty sure I'm not), I am not advocating for the Matriarchy (because that's sort of the opposite of what feminism means to me), and I refuse to spell "woman" or "women" with a "y" (because that's dumb).  

Declining to be a feminist because, as with all movements, there are some extremists who use the label, is like declining to be a Christian because of the Westboro Baptists are hateful idjits, or declining to be an atheist because Bill Maher is an anti-vaxxer, or declining to be — well, you get the idea.  There are bad apples in every barrel, especially when human beings are concerned.

Or, as the Bloggess puts it (much more entertainingly than I) …

Reshared post from +Les Jenkins

This. So so this.

Women Who are Ambivalent about Women Against Women Against Feminism | The Bloggess
So…yeah. Right now there’s a lot of talk about a tumblr called WomenAgainstFeminism. It’s just pictures of some women holding up handwritten signs entitled “I don’t need feminism because…” Some of the reasons they give for not needing feminism almost seem like a parody (“How the fuck am I …

59 view(s)  

7 thoughts on “Feminists and Anti-Feminists”

  1. +Melissa Walsh Ah, but "lady" is elitist, and is usually associated with "lord" or "gentleman," who is still considered to be dominant. Only by taking one's own name of choice can one truly be free of the Patriarchy's dictionary-makers!

    (Don't look at me, I just work here.)

    I can understand the argument, to some degree — choosing the terms of the discussion often allows control of the discussion, and, dodgy linguistics aside, there can be a perception that "woman" is a derivation of / subordinate to "man," akin to Eve being formed from Adam's rib as a subordinate afterthought. I get that.

    But it's tough to drive language change, especially from the edges, and those who (mostly in feminism's early academic hey-day of the 60s and 70s) pushed this "womyn/womin" thing ended up instead pushing themselves into an identifiable and ridicule-inducing niche. (That's how I see it, anyway.)

  2. Had a look over at the linked site. All I can say is there’s sure a lot of “NOT ALL FEMINISTS…” going on over there! Goose/Gander, you know… I’ve grown really weary of Feminist double standards, although I was for women’s rights long before I ever heard of “feminism”. (If you don’t know what I’m talking about, just Google “Not All Men”.)

    Your mention of “womyn” made me think back to the early days of “Ms.” We guys mostly went along with that, even though to those who’ve spent time in the South it always sounded awfully cornpone (“Miz Sally”,” Miz Smith”, etc.). What I’m wondering now is whether that usage has ever really spread outside the confines of U.S./English-speaking circles? What about France for instance? Hard to imagine the French giving up “mademoiselle”, but then again … Can anyone enlighten me?

    1. @paintedjaguar – No, I’m familiar with the “Not All Men” idea. I’m not altogether comfortable with it — I understand how the phrase can be used to shut down discussion, but I’m also uncomfortable with standing by during shame-painting with a large brush.

      In the case of “Not All Feminists” (as opposed to “No True Scotsman”), I think there’s a worthwhile discussion to be had about the breadth of what “feminism” means, named or unnnamed. In my own set of qualifications I made, I’d never say that someone who disagreed with any of my “this I believe, this I don’t” is not a true feminist; by definition, any generalization you can make about feminism, aside from _maybe_ some ur-principles, is going to mean some significant number of feminists is excluded. Which is okay — I find more danger in “All Feminists …” statements than in “Not All Feminists …” statements. Ditto for “… Men …”. Rejecting the inappropriate use of that statement as a tactic doesn’t mean the statement is factually wrong.

      I honestly have no idea about gender-neutral language in other countries — an interesting question, esp. for those which have gender built into their grammar.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *