Just why, bitch?

[FlyingNarwhal]

Here's the thing, though: I'm not sure that label is all down to the radical feminists. I freely grant that they are the extremely vocal minority, but one has to admit that it's also wonderfully convenient for those that oppose the feminist message- or just don't want to deal with it- to have an obviously crazy minority that they can pretend represent the entire group


This is an extreme being played up by both sides of the issue, and merely abandoning the term feminist to the radicals isn't going to change that, because the association is going to follow with the premise, and not the word. It's the same way that "freethinker," and "secularist," and even "evolutionist," is synonymous with atheist; those terms describe somewhat similar things, and so they've been attached with atheism despite being different words. The only thing we'd gain from fleeing from the term is the image that there's something to flee from, and possibly the idea that we're being dishonest by dressing up our views as something else.

I understand that it's a small portion of the entire group that are what you would call radical feminists, but I feel as though that minority has almost complete control of your label. Unfortunately like you said they are extremely vocal and are the image many people think of when they think feminist. I also agree that people will follow the premise not the word, but I think you have a different premise than the radical feminists. The core of what you both believe are probably more similar, but these radical feminists have taken what they believe to an extreme level and now represent the entire group through public perception. Just as a recommendation I don't even think moderate feminists would need a full name change, rather just a specifier. Say you subscribe to "something-feminism (replace "something with an actual word) so you can retain your word, and also separate yourself from these radicals. For example: existential-nihilsm vs. nihilism or neo-conservative vs. conservative.

Just to be clear I get that your position is probably closer to the original ideology of feminism, I'm not saying you should change the name because I think you are different (at least not by much) from the original intention of feminism. What I'm trying to get across is that this may be one of those "cut your losses" times and your just gonna have to take the hit, unless of course you can somehow out vocalize the radicals. I don't necessarily agree all the time with feminism, but you at least deserve to not be lumped in with people that poorly represent you.

Because female equality- in all senses, not just the ones that are convenient for women- automatically redresses many of the unequal issues that males face, like the issues men face in custody and divorce cases, gender segregated drafts, and numerous others.

This is where I disagree with feminism and that it addresses the view points of men. I don't want to be part of an ideology that considers my best interests as a side effect. I know feminists look at the inequality in custody cases and look at it as unequal because in the custody system women have to bear the full responsibility as the caretaker. But many men look at the inequality and see the system saying that we are not capable of being caretakers. If women are able to change the system so they are not looked at as being the default caregiver that's great, but women not having as much responsibility to be the caretaker in the event of a divorce does not automatically change the view that men aren't equipped to raise children. It just changes the perception for women, not men.

Same thing with the draft. My main gripe with the draft being only for men is not only that it is unfair to men, but that it is the culmination of the belief that men's lives are typically looked at as being of less worth than women. We are required to sacrifice ourselves in certain situations. I am expected to die in war so women can live or if a boat sinks and there is some kind of emergency evacuation it's women and children first. This issue won't be solved just by recognizing that there is inequality between the two sexes and making it even. It needs to be solved by recognizing the obvious misconception that men's lives have lesser value than women, not as an afterthought to the equality of women.