Men's Rights Movement

[Catholic_Lady]

Being a feminist used to just mean you support women having the same legal rights as men under the law.

Now a days, since women already have all the same legal rights, it doesn't mean anything specific anymore to say you're a feminist. Because people have such different opinions on what is "pro female." As Tib's said, some feminists will say prostitution and pornography is empowering to women... others will say it's oppressive. Some feminists will think that women should be more like men.... others will say true feminism embraces femininity and all of its unique qualities. There are some feminist groups that are pro life. There are some that are an insufferable group of man hating women who won't shut up.

So, excuse us I suppose if we refrain from using a term that could mean so many different things. Can't we just agree that women have the same worth as men and should have the same legal rights? Most civilized people already think that anyway. We don't need a term for it anymore, other than just being a normal human being.

[FatAndFaithless]

Being a feminist used to just mean you support women having the same legal rights as men under the law.

Now a days, since women already have all the same legal rights, it doesn't mean anything specific anymore to say you're a feminist. Because people have such different opinions on what is "pro female." As Tib's said, some feminists will say prostitution and pornography is empowering to women... others will say it's oppressive. Some feminists will think that women should be more like men.... others will say true feminism embraces femininity and all of its unique qualities. There are some feminist groups that are pro life. There are some that are an insufferable group of man hating women who won't shut up.

So, excuse us I suppose if we refrain from using a term that could mean so many different things. Can't we just agree that women have the same worth as men and should have the same legal rights? Most civilized people already think that anyway. We don't need a term for it anymore, other than just being a normal human being.

Your post is exactly why I'm hesitant to use most labels.  Unless it's a specific, singular descriptor (like 'atheist'), I tend not to use them.  There are situations where I will happily use a label, such as secular humanist, because I think the areas of disagreement within that label don't discount the overall mission. But for terms like feminist...I feel like the disagreements about what the label entails overshadows the value of the label itself.

[Edwardo Piet]

Now a days, since women already have all the same legal rights, it doesn't mean anything specific anymore to say you're a feminist.

It does still have meaning because there's more to feminism than being about legal rights

---

. . .

It's about equality but it's specifically about the fact women tend to get the short end of the stick unofficially despite the fact the law says otherwise officially.

The fact that feminism is a more important as a movement than egalitarianism is for exactly the same reason that the Black Lives Matter movement is more important than an All Lives Matter movement. When Black people still regularly get the short end of the stick it trivializes their difficulties if we instead insist on pushing "all lives matter". I mean, duh, of course all lives and all races matter. But the point is that Black people still tend to get the short end of the stick.

It's exactly the same with egalitarianism. Technically it is correct: Equality is ultimately what matters, duh. Just like all lives, and all races, matter, duh. But instead of pointlessly pushing the obvious value of equality it's important to focus on the fact that women still tend to get the short end of the stick: Hence why feminism and BLM are more important movements than egalitarianism and ALM.

Priorities. That's what it's about.

[Tiberius]

Some feminists oppose sex workers and think they are anti-feminist, some feminists say sex workers are pro-feminist because they are free to use their bodies how they like. Egalitarians believe the latter.

Well, it's not just egalitarians that believe the latter though. It's the true feminists that believe the latter too.

True feminism is defined by what feminism actually is, not by people who claim to be supporting women's rights but then think stuff that has nothing to do with women's rights (like denying them the right to be a sex worker???? How is that pro women's rights? Denying a right is not pro rights. I mean fair enough if they wish to deny EVERYONE rights as a sex worker but to deny women a right and not men and to claim to be pro women's rights... doesn't make any sense at all).

Claiming to be a feminist but not being fully women's rights doesn't make you a feminist. Being anti-male rights doesn't make you a feminist. Being pro women's rights makes you a feminist. Denying women certain rights and claiming you're still fully pro women's rights doesn't make you truly a feminist just like claiming to be a Christian but not following Jesus Christ or the Bible won't make you a Christian.

I'm both an egalitarianism and an actual feminist. I don't see any point in not being a feminist when I'm an egalitarian. If I wasn't pro women's rights I wouldn't be pro-equality. I'm pro men's rights too but men don't need a group fighting for their rights because the very fact that feminism started in the first place is because men alright have more rights than women.

Unfortunately Hammy, there's disagreement over what "true feminism" is. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_m...ideologies

This is part of the problem. New Age feminists believe that sex workers have a right to do their work. Older forms of feminism believe that any kind of sex work that involves male customers simply enforces male dominance over women, and that women are more often than not coerced into sex work. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_v...ostitution

They don't see abolishing sex workers as taking away women's rights, they see it as freeing women from male oppression. That's the problem.

[FatAndFaithless]

Now a days, since women already have all the same legal rights, it doesn't mean anything specific anymore to say you're a feminist.

It does still have meaning because there's more to feminism than being about legal rights

---

. . .

It's about equality but it's specifically about the fact women tend to get the short end of the stick unofficially despite the fact the law says otherwise officially.

The fact that feminism is a more important as a movement than egalitarianism is for exactly the same reason that the Black Lives Matter movement is more important than an All Lives Matter movement. When Black people still regularly get the short end of the stick it trivializes their difficulties if we instead insist on pushing "all lives matter". I mean, duh, of course all lives and all races matter. But the point is that Black people still tend to get the short end of the stick.

It's exactly the same with egalitarianism. Technically it is correct: Equality is ultimately what matters, duh. Just like all lives, and all races, matter, duh. But instead of pushing the obvious equality value it's important to focus on the fact that women still tend to get the short end of the stick: Hence why feminism and BLM are more important movements than egalitarianism and ALM.

I totally agree with you that movements are needed to draw attention to areas of disparity in society, and that adopting a vanilla "everyone should be equal" mantra kind of de-emphasizes the areas of greatest inequality.  I just think in this specific instance of this label (feminist), it's impossible to determine the motives/views/goals of an individual that uses it based on the word 'feminist', so it might not be a very useful label.

[Shell B]

I think you sound way more coherent in your head than you actually are. No one's trying to get you to call them a racist. You're paranoid. I'm pointing out that using race and labeling anyone who disagrees as "Alt-Right" or "MRA" are traits of the so-called "fringe." Try to focus on the actual debate instead of your weird personal vendetta and my irrelevant relationship to Tibs. You get so hung up on that, not even realizing that we don't actually hold the same position on this topic. I don't care what my "dear old hubby" says or does to you. That's his debate, not mine.

But YOU'RE the one who brought it up, yet again, Shell. 
I've made it clear that I don't think this conversation has anything to do with race, but you insist on circling back to it for some unknown reason. I just guessed at to what that reason is.

If I'm wrong, then tell me....Why do you keep coming back to it?

And I don't label ANYONE who disagrees me as Alt Right or MRA. I specifically labeled you your husband as a sympathizer, because he parrots their talking points

I circled back to it because you asked me why I thought you were like a "fringe" feminist. You asked a question. I answered it.

If you could see how ridiculous calling tibs Alt Right is, you'd be embarrassed.

[Edwardo Piet]

Well, it's not just egalitarians that believe the latter though. It's the true feminists that believe the latter too.

True feminism is defined by what feminism actually is, not by people who claim to be supporting women's rights but then think stuff that has nothing to do with women's rights (like denying them the right to be a sex worker???? How is that pro women's rights? Denying a right is not pro rights. I mean fair enough if they wish to deny EVERYONE rights as a sex worker but to deny women a right and not men and to claim to be pro women's rights... doesn't make any sense at all).

Claiming to be a feminist but not being fully women's rights doesn't make you a feminist. Being anti-male rights doesn't make you a feminist. Being pro women's rights makes you a feminist. Denying women certain rights and claiming you're still fully pro women's rights doesn't make you truly a feminist just like claiming to be a Christian but not following Jesus Christ or the Bible won't make you a Christian.

I'm both an egalitarianism and an actual feminist. I don't see any point in not being a feminist when I'm an egalitarian. If I wasn't pro women's rights I wouldn't be pro-equality. I'm pro men's rights too but men don't need a group fighting for their rights because the very fact that feminism started in the first place is because men alright have more rights than women.

Unfortunately Hammy, there's disagreement over what "true feminism" is. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_m...ideologies

This is part of the problem. New Age feminists believe that sex workers have a right to do their work. Older forms of feminism believe that any kind of sex work that involves male customers simply enforces male dominance over women, and that women are more often than not coerced into sex work. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_v...ostitution

They don't see abolishing sex workers as taking away women's rights, they see it as freeing women from male oppression. That's the problem.

Well they're simply wrong because as long as the men aren't actually oppressing them then they should have just as much of a right to be a sex worker as men should.

It would make sense to be a feminist and deny women such 'right' if you genuinely believed that in every case that women are sex workers men are always oppressing them. Because you'd be denying women even more rights (and freedom) by allowing them to be oppressed that way.

But there's a such thing as being right about these things, it's not like it's all fair game on who gets to define what being pro rights and who isn't. Some opinions actually are pro rights and some aren't. Not all opinions are equal on this matter. ( “All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.” ― Douglas Adams, The Salmon of Doubt) and 'feminists' who think that men are always and by definition oppressing women if women are being sex workers are simply deluded.

They might think they're being pro-women's rights by pushing their delusion that female sex workers are necessarily always exploited and oppressed but the fact they think they're being pro-women's rights doesn't mean they actually are if they are in fact denying women rights and freedom for no good reason.

---

It does still have meaning because there's more to feminism than being about legal rights

---

. . .

It's about equality but it's specifically about the fact women tend to get the short end of the stick unofficially despite the fact the law says otherwise officially.

The fact that feminism is a more important as a movement than egalitarianism is for exactly the same reason that the Black Lives Matter movement is more important than an All Lives Matter movement. When Black people still regularly get the short end of the stick it trivializes their difficulties if we instead insist on pushing "all lives matter". I mean, duh, of course all lives and all races matter. But the point is that Black people still tend to get the short end of the stick.

It's exactly the same with egalitarianism. Technically it is correct: Equality is ultimately what matters, duh. Just like all lives, and all races, matter, duh. But instead of pushing the obvious equality value it's important to focus on the fact that women still tend to get the short end of the stick: Hence why feminism and BLM are more important movements than egalitarianism and ALM.

I totally agree with you that movements are needed to draw attention to areas of disparity in society, and that adopting a vanilla "everyone should be equal" mantra kind of de-emphasizes the areas of greatest inequality.  I just think in this specific instance of this label (feminist), it's impossible to determine the motives/views/goals of an individual that uses it based on the word 'feminist', so it might not be a very useful label.

It's probably only becoming a less useful label because anti-men feminists who believe in far more than just feminism are pretending like all they're about is feminism and too many people are taking these so-called 'extremists' (it's not the feminism part that's extreme) wayyyyyy too seriously.

[Shell B]

That's his point. He's hesitant to call himself a feminist because it's not clearly defined.

For my part, I tend not to use labels at all, if I can help it.

[Tiberius]

Well they're simply wrong because as long as the men aren't actually oppressing them then they should have just as much of a right to be a sex worker as men should.

It would make sense to be a feminist and deny women such 'right' if you genuinely believed that in every case that women are sex workers men are always oppressing them. Because you'd be denying women even more rights (and freedom) by allowing them to be oppressed that way.

But there's a such thing as being right about these things, it's not like it's all fair game on who gets to define what being pro rights and who isn't. Some opinions actually are pro rights and some aren't. Not all opinions are equal on this matter. ( “All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.” ― Douglas Adams, The Salmon of Doubt) and 'feminists' who think that men are always and by definition oppressing women if women are being sex workers are simply deluded.

They might think they're being pro-women's rights by pushing their delusion that female sex workers are necessarily always exploited and oppressed but the fact they think they're being pro-women's rights doesn't mean they actually are if they are in fact denying women rights and freedom for no good reason.

Right, and this is the problem the feminist movement faces in a nutshell. There's a massive split on this one issue.

I agree with the New Age feminists on it, I'm fully in support of sex positivism. Sex workers should be legal and protected.

[Athene]

Being a feminist used to just mean you support women having the same legal rights as men under the law.

Now a days, since women already have all the same legal rights, it doesn't mean anything specific anymore to say you're a feminist. 

Do you not understand that there can be a fair amount of daylight between having rights in theory and having them in practice? Do you reject the the notion that a certain degree of vigilance may be required in maintaining an upgrade from second-class citizenship?