Any anti-feminists? Any feminists?

[Alex K]

Never the less what are these feminism "waves"? There's dumb shit right there

I forget, but it was something like the first wave is the old suffragette movement or so, the second wave is the 20th century feminism, and the third wave is the modern version which is more conscious of LGBT issues than the version from the 60s and 70s. I may be mixing them up though.

[Athene]

I'm comfortable saying that I'm a feminist. 

I refuse to abstain from using that particular label (among many, many others) to define myself, simply because others have no personal use for said label, misconceive my notion of feminism due to someone else's radical views, or because they find the notion itself, "stupid". 

I tend to file that sort of shit under "Not My Problem".

Why are you feminist?

I believe that women should be entitled to the same legal, political, economic, and personal rights that men are entitled to.

[ScienceAf]

Why are you feminist?

I believe that women should be entitled to the same legal, political, economic, and personal rights that men are entitled to.

They are.
I don't call myself "abolitionist" because I believe black people shouldn't be slaves.
Because they aren't
The abolitionist movement and the feminist movement have achieved their goals.

[ScienceAf]

Never the less what are these feminism "waves"? There's dumb shit right there

I forget, but it was something like the first wave is the old suffragette movement or so, the second wave is the 20th century feminism, and the third wave is the modern version which is more conscious of LGBT issues than the version from the 60s and 70s. I may be mixing them up though.

First is the suffragette movement.

Second is wage gap or belief that women don't maintain the same rights.

Third is anti-male.

But sometimes the lines are blurred.

[Jesster]

And yet there are still civil rights activists... for the same reason there are feminists.

[Tiberius]

I'm a feminist in the strictest sense of the word, but I prefer the term egalitarian. I feel like most "feminists" these days spend their time focused on spreading misinformation and making a fuss over nothing.

If there is actual sexism involved then I will oppose it.

[ScienceAf]

1) Of course they are merits of equality. Women have equality, because of paper that the majority follows.
If it is not followed, the ones in power (The Gov't) will punish. Paper or words, the majority and the most powerful rules and we must follow their creed.

Hey, could you find me the spot in the Constitution where everyone has the right to equal pay for equal work?

You can't find it, because it's not in there. But is certainly one inequality that feminism helped to ameliorate -- although it still exists, particularly with regard to race.

2) Well the majority didn't seem to agree with it, (Sorry, I don't know much about the Nisei, could you clarify?) and the change from the AoC to the Constitution just shows that if those words weren't altered to create a different framework for the government things would have gone differently.

You seem to think I'm arguing that words are meaningless, I'm not. It's important to have rights enumerated legally. But that doesn't guarantee rights in practice.

I'm pretty sure, by the way, that the majority of Americans agreed with both Jim Crow and interning Japanese in the camps.

3) Feminism became obsolete when women had gotten rights. If you think words on paper (decided by the majority and the powerful) don't have meaning, that apparently means women have less rights? No. It would mean they have different rights.

Yeah, that's kinda the point, you know. Equal rights, not different. You're mounting a pretty incoherent argument here: feminism is obsolete because women have different rights than men. Equal rights means that all people share the same panoply of rights regardless of race, gender, sexuality, religion or lack thereof, etc.

So that would mean that men also have some problems to? Yeah. Stereotypes such as women don't lie about rape ("Take all accusations of rape against women by men to be true!") would be set into motion. Because certainly a lot of people see women as victims.

Why are you introducing this into this conversation? It's entirely irrelevant.

The majority doesn't see women as tools or sub-human.

No one said the majority sees them any way at all.

So if the words on paper don't have meaning. The thoughts of the majority certainly do.

Leaving aside the fact that I didn't say "words on paper have no meaning", the fact is that if your good treatment is dependent upon majority opinion, that is not a right at all.

1) Sure, it's not in the constitution, but when we needed feminism it helped (along with other movements) lead to the "Civil rights act of 1964". And of course not everyone deserves equal pay. There's qualifications to be met.

2) I meant that the majority didn't and after a while through protests, movements, etc, they came to a change in mind.

3) I'm saying if the claim was true then the rights would have been different rather than less. But we have equal rights.

4) Forgot why.

5) Exactly

6) Well there is no objective opinion and the majority can not always be justified, however the majority sees women as equal and the majority/gov't holds the power.

P.S
What's your definition of equality?
What rights do men have that women don't?

[ScienceAf]

I'm a feminist in the strictest sense of the word, but I prefer the term egalitarian. I feel like most "feminists" these days spend their time focused on spreading misinformation and making a fuss over nothing.

If there is actual sexism involved then I will oppose it.

Well then, that's great!

I'm sure every sane moral human is egalitarian.

Equal opportunity.

[ScienceAf]

Holy fuck. People like ScienceAf are why I'm a feminist. This thread is making my argument for me.

How so?

[ScienceAf]

And yet there are still civil rights activists... for the same reason there are feminists.

What are the reasons?
To get an illusion of meaning and power?