Is Feminism Outdated?

[iHeartCats]

A couple of years ago I used to see a lot of threads and discussions about feminism on forums.
I don't see any such threads these days.

It seems to me that feminism has become outdated and unpopular, since no one makes threads about it these days and nobody seems to care about it.
Could it be that it is outdated now?

 

[ZcM4xzkjgzCjytBc]

I wonder what happened to emos.

 

[La Sagna]

Feminism is not a fad. Personally I think it will never go away completely (a good thing because of bad reasons). We had a long thread on it a few months ago on here. I'm sure another discussion will pop up at some point.

 

[La Sagna]

I've been seeing a lot of anti-feminism stuff being shared in social media by very uninformed women and counteracted by feminists.

 

[Stu]

ever notice the differences in the mannerisms of women from different countries? It is interesting to observe that in nations where women have a greater economic and political parity with men that the feminine mystique is more subdued, that to experience that aspect of those women requires a greater intimacy.

 

[invisible]

i became very interested in feminism during my undergraduate degree, i think partly due to the way that the classes i took were being taught (i had some amazingly talented and brilliant teachers), but also due to my own inclination. i read feminist or proto-feminist literatures from all different times, medieval/pre-modern through modern and i guess "postmodern" periods. in terms of criticism, apart from reading a lot of various articles and chapters out of things i read the whole of "The Feminine Mystique", and i also burned determinedly through a Helene Cixous reader that was very difficult for me but so fascinating. i took a feminist literary course that was filled both with works of literature and also criticism. i enjoyed it all so much, and found it all so valuable and interesting, even things that are rejected by most people working in academic (or popular) feminist theory, such as man/male-hate, and even though i could at the same time recognise that i am a man. i think that all of those feminisms constitute such a rich theoretical cluster, by which i mean, the standard of work that has gone into those areas is both very detailed and very high quality, academically fearless and courageous.

usually when i see threads on the internet about feminism i become very impatient, because it is so clear to me that people who are posting on those threads have about as much understanding of feminist theory as i do of calculus - which is to say, nothing. but they dont know that feminism is complex or various. i dont know why that is. why do people believe that they have automatic intellectual access to critical/cultural theory, but dont dare to approach calculus? maybe because of the cultural beliefs about numerical as opposed to alphabetical language, im not really sure. but most people just dont seem to want to learn about feminism, what it is, and what it means. they think they know it all. they have "opinions".

 

[invisible]

if you are interested in feminist literatures, i think my two favourite most specific feminist things i have consumed were "The Yellow Wallpaper" by Charlotte Perkins Gilman, and "The Awakening" by Kate Chopin. of course, there are so many others - those are just the things that stood out for me as seeming like they have the most "enduring relevance" as particularly feminist literary works. its true that some things have changed, but its amazing how much hasnt changed. people are always saying that feminism isnt relevant anymore, thats something that i just cant understand. when they read books from the 17th century, what they see is how different things are; what i tend to see is how similar everything is. i dont know why.

 

[SpecialEdition]

Feminism makes me fucking insane.

I think that the feminist ideas are very progressive but the way the world operates has not caught up to that. I do believe in equality, that all people should have equal rights, etc. But I do think that there is a certain female privilege when it comes to marriage and children. I think that courts and laws favour women over men. I do think that some women on the more extreme end of the feminist movement have sort of warped this pursuit of equality into man hating and trying to get a cut above.

To me, there are so many things between the genders that simply ARE NOT equal and I think a lot of that gets lost in the mix.

Get a divorce? Guess who gets everything you own? Separate and have a custody battle? Guess who is most likely to get the kids even if they are an unfit parent? Domestic assault? Guess who doesn't get taken seriously about abuse whether it be physical, emotional, sexual?

I mean, the way things are set up just so heavily favours women based on the times when they weren't "equal." Now that women are fully immersed in the work force and are standing on their own two feet and have amazing independence and opportunities and stuff, why do these particular laws still exist? If people want equality, then fucking give them true equality.

While I understand that there is a lot more that goes on with Feminism outside of these kinds of examples and outside of fundamentalism, this is what really irks me. That being said, when people do talk about Feminism it's usually never about the more subtle nuances between the sexes and how men and women operate not only on a social level but even on a biological, hormonal level. There's no real talk about women empowering women positively. Instead, we see a lot of women shaming and hating each other. It's almost as if if you're not with us (Against men), then you're for men. It eliminates equality and freedom of choice for other women.

I have seen so many women be shamed by others for wanting to be stay at home moms or work part time or do this or do that. Women who don't want to climb corporate ladders and who want to follow their own personal dreams of being a home maker.... As if they are personally responsible for inequality among the sexes. It's just not simply true.

I am a corporate ladder climber but would absolutely never shame someone for having a dream of staying home to raise a family. I don't know why people do this.

I don't know why people hate other people for doing what comes naturally to them.

This is a rant that went off on multiple tangents. But it kind of sets me off.

 

[Lark]

I believe that anti-feminism was in vogue at the time when threads were consumed with that kind of thing to be honest.

These things can be faddish in their appeal but that has less to do with the ideas themselves than the waxing and waning of zeitgheists. There are aspects of feminism which I think are perrenial and important, even a lot of the good criticism of feminism has used tools first developed or innovated by feminism itself (isnt that always the way with most of these things though).

Popular "emanicipation ideologies" may no longer inspire the way they once did in the parts of the world were they dont seem relevent anymore but there's always other parts of the world in which they are deadly serious still, consider freedom of the press or speech or religion and ISIS.

 

[Stu]

one last thing before this becomes a NWO thread

The rise of feminism, in my opinion, shows the natural development and rise of consciousness via ego strength, over unconsciousness. Consciousness is system of perception and reaction that is rooted in the unconscious but necessarily must divorce itself from much of the unconscious content. This has been played out in our internal narrative as a species as the journey of the "hero" and his recovery of the treasure or hostage through vanquishing the "dragon" .

So our "ego" is perceived as "masculine" to our narrative, and our unconsciousness is perceived as "feminine". That said it is becoming more apparent that these gender labels do not really apply to the psychic structures they refer to. Ego is the focus of consciousness, and a healthy ego is one that facilitates integration of unconscious content into the consciousness.

Feminism (in my opinion) asserts that the development of healthy ego strength is not only for the male gender.

 

[La Sagna]

To me, there are so many things between the genders that simply ARE NOT equal and I think a lot of that gets lost in the mix.

Get a divorce? Guess who gets everything you own? Separate and have a custody battle? Guess who is most likely to get the kids even if they are an unfit parent? Domestic assault? Guess who doesn't get taken seriously about abuse whether it be physical, emotional, sexual?

I mean, the way things are set up just so heavily favours women based on the times when they weren't "equal." Now that women are fully immersed in the work force and are standing on their own two feet and have amazing independence and opportunities and stuff, why do these particular laws still exist? If people want equality, then fucking give them true equality.

This is a position that is easy to take by women who come from privileged middle to upper class backgrounds and have support and resources to help them and don't realize that not all women have the same privilege and support as they have. Putting aside the fact that most women in the world are still second class citizens in their countries and just looking at the more developed countries where women have the same rights as men, there are still many women who live lives where they have very little choice and opportunity and they end up in situations of abuse or unhealthy lifestyles with very little support or opportunity to get out of the negative cycle. In Canada in particular, the domestic violence rate among Aboriginals is much higher than the average and the socio-economic situation of aboriginal women often put them in situations where they are vulnerable to violence and to be taken advantage of. Single mothers are also more vulnerable to all types of abuse and often have limited support. Why are there more single mothers raising their children than single fathers? I know there are some fathers that want to be there and raise their kids but there are also men who father children but do not want to have any responsibility in caring for them. Women are more vulnerable because of the physical difference in strength between the sexes, because men have a much higher rate of committing violent crimes and sexual based crimes and because women are the ones that get pregnant. It's just nature and no legislation will ever change that.

As for the family laws and if they are unfairly biased towards women, every jurisdiction is slightly different and of course the quality of the judges will also make a difference but overall they are similar. I do agree that certainly in the past and possibly to a certain degree now women have been the primary ones to be given custody of the children, although I think it's getting better. Everybody that I know who has separated and divorced in the last ten years and had young children had pretty equal access and parenting between the two parents except in cases where there were good reasons for it to be otherwise and it can go either towards the father or the mother in that case depending on the situation. As for the women getting everything, where do you get your information on that? Assets are split equally. In some cases the spouse with a much lower income because of having given up on earning potential to take care of the home and children can get a limited amount of support. It can be the man or the woman. My son and his wife are planning on having kids and he will likely stay at home to raise them. I would certainly hope that if for some reason the marriage breaks down and he has given up a lot of career potential to take care of the kids while she works herself up the corporate ladder to a good career that he would be compensated for the sacrifices he made as should a woman in the same situation. I completely agree with you that women (and men) should be free to stay home if they choose and not be shamed for it, the same way I believe women shouldn't be shamed if they want a career, but if you think about it how fair would it be for a woman to stay home and take care of the kids and give up on her career to then be served divorce papers and told that she is on her own now and he doesn't have to support her to some small degree until she can have a career and be able to support herself. If this were the case we would have a lot more women living in poverty or women staying in abusive relationships so they don't end up poor.

 

[Deleted member 12009]

People are starting to realize that feminism means torturing and eradicating men. Of course not many would support such a movement.

 

[Lark]

People are starting to realize that feminism means torturing and eradicating men. Of course not many would support such a movement.

I dont think that and I dont think that's what feminism has been about or could be about.

 

[La Sagna]

People are starting to realize that feminism means torturing and eradicating men. Of course not many would support such a movement.

The first part is wrong but the second part is right.

 

[sassafras]

One word for you all: tumblr.

I invite you to spend about an hour or so on there and experience feminism and social justice taken to a fanatic level of ignorance and privilege and you'll quickly see that it isn't 'outdated' at all. It's perfectly in vogue (if you can really describe it as such). The trouble is, while many of these feminists mean well and have been instrumental in bringing forth many of the issues that are pertinent to women in second and third world countries in addition to women of colour, at the heart of it, most of the movement and its ideas have been dangerously warped by the most massive game of broken telephone ever.

Beneath the surface, its a den of racism, sexism and blatant misandry that is slowly leaking its poison into other social media. Has anyone read any youtube comments lately? Pick a video, any video. Or head to facebook. Or reddit or twitter. Once you see it, you can make a drinking game out of it because trust me, once it all becomes clear, you'll be happy to be drinking.

Very happy indeed.

Of course, knowing @SpecialEdition 's vehement stance on this, I'd suggest she of all people NOT take on the challenge and venture there less she wants to suffer an aneurysm from the sheer volume of stupidity.

 

[SpecialEdition]

This is a position that is easy to take by women who come from privileged middle to upper class backgrounds and have support and resources to help them and don't realize that not all women have the same privilege and support as they have. Putting aside the fact that most women in the world are still second class citizens in their countries and just looking at the more developed countries where women have the same rights as men, there are still many women who live lives where they have very little choice and opportunity and they end up in situations of abuse or unhealthy lifestyles with very little support or opportunity to get out of the negative cycle. In Canada in particular, the domestic violence rate among Aboriginals is much higher than the average and the socio-economic situation of aboriginal women often put them in situations where they are vulnerable to violence and to be taken advantage of. Single mothers are also more vulnerable to all types of abuse and often have limited support. Why are there more single mothers raising their children than single fathers? I know there are some fathers that want to be there and raise their kids but there are also men who father children but do not want to have any responsibility in caring for them. Women are more vulnerable because of the physical difference in strength between the sexes, because men have a much higher rate of committing violent crimes and sexual based crimes and because women are the ones that get pregnant. It's just nature and no legislation will ever change that.

As for the family laws and if they are unfairly biased towards women, every jurisdiction is slightly different and of course the quality of the judges will also make a difference but overall they are similar. I do agree that certainly in the past and possibly to a certain degree now women have been the primary ones to be given custody of the children, although I think it's getting better. Everybody that I know who has separated and divorced in the last ten years and had young children had pretty equal access and parenting between the two parents except in cases where there were good reasons for it to be otherwise and it can go either towards the father or the mother in that case depending on the situation. As for the women getting everything, where do you get your information on that? Assets are split equally. In some cases the spouse with a much lower income because of having given up on earning potential to take care of the home and children can get a limited amount of support. It can be the man or the woman. My son and his wife are planning on having kids and he will likely stay at home to raise them. I would certainly hope that if for some reason the marriage breaks down and he has given up a lot of career potential to take care of the kids while she works herself up the corporate ladder to a good career that he would be compensated for the sacrifices he made as should a woman in the same situation. I completely agree with you that women (and men) should be free to stay home if they choose and not be shamed for it, the same way I believe women shouldn't be shamed if they want a career, but if you think about it how fair would it be for a woman to stay home and take care of the kids and give up on her career to then be served divorce papers and told that she is on her own now and he doesn't have to support her to some small degree until she can have a career and be able to support herself. If this were the case we would have a lot more women living in poverty or women staying in abusive relationships so they don't end up poor.

I hope you are not making assumptions about my socio-economical background. It would be a shame if you viewed my posts through the lens that I didn't grow up in a trailer park and on welfare with one disabled parent and one parent (my mother) who had to work more than one job and even despite how hard she had to work we still ended up in mountains of debt and in desperate need of social assistance just so that we could eat some toast once in a while and maybe even have something that wasn't just meatloaf. It would also be too bad to assume I didn't have to start working at 12 and work full time hours all through high school so that I could help support my family by paying for gas, groceries, school uniforms, trips etc for my younger sister and I.... It's also too bad that most of my father's side of the family is dead and my mother's side is rampant with mental illness and other problems that very, very strongly prevent them from resembling anything like upper or middle class citizens.

As for what you are saying about the state of the female condition worldwide, I am aware of this. I also come from a town that is very heavily populated with Natives. I had a friend who had to flee her reservation because there was a very high rate of abuse, rape and murder. Some murders that were committed within her own family. I have seen what kind of position this kind of thing puts not just women, but ALL people in who are involved in those circumstances. Also. I believe some of the data is flawed about men committing more violent acts, etc. Many violent acts and even non-violent abuse against men is not reported as it is simply not taken as seriously. So statistics aside, we have to look at the boarder picture, particularly in North America. As for the situation for women world wide, yes that is difficult but I also have a very hard time judging countries, policies, religious, cultures in countries that have existed thousands of years before my own. I also believe that while we can create awareness for what those women go through, those women also have to band together and find a way to rise up above what's happening to them. It is very difficult but how much influence am I going to have, or how much are you going to have? We have seen first hand what happens when countries decide to impose their own values on another one. It leaves things in ruins. I am not saying it's justified. I am saying that what we feel is ideal and right here is a VERY different story out there.

As for someone who gives up their earning potential, this is a VERY different situation than two people who are working and equally contributing financially. An example is someone I know works full time. His ex wife works full time and makes a lot more money. She won the custody battle but now he is paying a shit ton of child support and she now gets half of everything because of the divorce. Why? Because he is the man? Now he is barely able to survive and his health is very much on the line because of the stress of the situation. His wife feels entitled to his income on top of what she gets in child support even though she makes above and beyond what he does. I have known people who have lost half of their pension and have had to go back to work because the wife left and wanted half of everything and felt entitled to it even though she was 100% self sufficient and able to provide. Why is this allowed to happen? Divorce can bring most men to financial ruin unless right from the get go there's a pre-nup. These are just two very small examples based on a lot of what I have read and I think it's fucking disgusting. But that's an old rule set up based on a time when women generally did stay at home and were not set up to be able to provide for themselves if that marriage failed.

My concern is SPECIFICALLY about women who have not given up earning potential or their career and may actually be in a better position financially than their husbands who, despite being able to provide for themselves, still take half of everything that the man earns including his retirement.

 

[SpecialEdition]

One word for you all: tumblr.

I invite you to spend about an hour or so on there and experience feminism and social justice taken to a fanatic level of ignorance and privilege and you'll quickly see that it isn't 'outdated' at all. It's perfectly in vogue (if you can really describe it as such). The trouble is, while many of these feminists mean well and have been instrumental in bringing forth many of the issues that are pertinent to women in second and third world countries in addition to women of colour, at the heart of it, most of the movement and its ideas have been dangerously warped by the most massive game of broken telephone ever.

Beneath the surface, its a den of racism, sexism and blatant misandry that is slowly leaking its poison into other social media. Has anyone read any youtube comments lately? Pick a video, any video. Or head to facebook. Or reddit or twitter. Once you see it, you can make a drinking game out of it because trust me, once it all becomes clear, you'll be happy to be drinking.

Very happy indeed.

Of course, knowing @SpecialEdition 's vehement stance on this, I'd suggest she of all people NOT take on the challenge and venture there less she wants to suffer an aneurysm from the sheer volume of stupidity.

I have already been there. It induces a particular kind of rage in me that I really try not to let leak out all over my responses, but I absolutely fucking get disgusted by the things that I have read on those websites. And those kinds of movements are becoming stronger and stronger.

I am not against improving the lives of women. I am against the fucking deplorable, ignorant, close minded man hating subset of "feminists" who I wish I could wipe off the planet.

This is me putting it very mildly.

 

[say what]

People are starting to realize that feminism means torturing and eradicating men. Of course not many would support such a movement.

People are starting to realize that men believe that feminism means torturing and eradicating men.

 

[Lark]

One word for you all: tumblr.

I invite you to spend about an hour or so on there and experience feminism and social justice taken to a fanatic level of ignorance and privilege and you'll quickly see that it isn't 'outdated' at all. It's perfectly in vogue (if you can really describe it as such). The trouble is, while many of these feminists mean well and have been instrumental in bringing forth many of the issues that are pertinent to women in second and third world countries in addition to women of colour, at the heart of it, most of the movement and its ideas have been dangerously warped by the most massive game of broken telephone ever.

Beneath the surface, its a den of racism, sexism and blatant misandry that is slowly leaking its poison into other social media. Has anyone read any youtube comments lately? Pick a video, any video. Or head to facebook. Or reddit or twitter. Once you see it, you can make a drinking game out of it because trust me, once it all becomes clear, you'll be happy to be drinking.

Very happy indeed.

Of course, knowing @SpecialEdition 's vehement stance on this, I'd suggest she of all people NOT take on the challenge and venture there less she wants to suffer an aneurysm from the sheer volume of stupidity.

I've seen that happen to more than just feminism, I've seen examples on this forum even and another forum.

The people who benefit are the conservatives and standard opposition to progressive ideas.

 

[La Sagna]

I hope you are not making assumptions about my socio-economical background. It would be a shame if you viewed my posts through the lens that I didn't grow up in a trailer park and on welfare with one disabled parent and one parent (my mother) who had to work more than one job and even despite how hard she had to work we still ended up in mountains of debt and in desperate need of social assistance just so that we could eat some toast once in a while and maybe even have something that wasn't just meatloaf. It would also be too bad to assume I didn't have to start working at 12 and work full time hours all through high school so that I could help support my family by paying for gas, groceries, school uniforms, trips etc for my younger sister and I.... It's also too bad that most of my father's side of the family is dead and my mother's side is rampant with mental illness and other problems that very, very strongly prevent them from resembling anything like upper or middle class citizens.

As for what you are saying about the state of the female condition worldwide, I am aware of this. I also come from a town that is very heavily populated with Natives. I had a friend who had to flee her reservation because there was a very high rate of abuse, rape and murder. Some murders that were committed within her own family. I have seen what kind of position this kind of thing puts not just women, but ALL people in who are involved in those circumstances. Also. I believe some of the data is flawed about men committing more violent acts, etc. Many violent acts and even non-violent abuse against men is not reported as it is simply not taken as seriously. So statistics aside, we have to look at the boarder picture, particularly in North America. As for the situation for women world wide, yes that is difficult but I also have a very hard time judging countries, policies, religious, cultures in countries that have existed thousands of years before my own. I also believe that while we can create awareness for what those women go through, those women also have to band together and find a way to rise up above what's happening to them. It is very difficult but how much influence am I going to have, or how much are you going to have? We have seen first hand what happens when countries decide to impose their own values on another one. It leaves things in ruins. I am not saying it's justified. I am saying that what we feel is ideal and right here is a VERY different story out there.

As for someone who gives up their earning potential, this is a VERY different situation than two people who are working and equally contributing financially. An example is someone I know works full time. His ex wife works full time and makes a lot more money. She won the custody battle but now he is paying a shit ton of child support and she now gets half of everything because of the divorce. Why? Because he is the man? Now he is barely able to survive and his health is very much on the line because of the stress of the situation. His wife feels entitled to his income on top of what she gets in child support even though she makes above and beyond what he does. I have known people who have lost half of their pension and have had to go back to work because the wife left and wanted half of everything and felt entitled to it even though she was 100% self sufficient and able to provide. Why is this allowed to happen? Divorce can bring most men to financial ruin unless right from the get go there's a pre-nup. These are just two very small examples based on a lot of what I have read and I think it's fucking disgusting. But that's an old rule set up based on a time when women generally did stay at home and were not set up to be able to provide for themselves if that marriage failed.

My concern is SPECIFICALLY about women who have not given up earning potential or their career and may actually be in a better position financially than their husbands who, despite being able to provide for themselves, still take half of everything that the man earns including his retirement.

I wasn't making any assumptions about you in particular but just commenting on how this is a stance that is mostly taken by women who have lived fairly privileged lives and don't know that there are many women who haven't had the same chances in life and end up more vulnerable to being abused. Obviously that is not your case.

Child support is very different than spousal support. That is supposed to go towards the cost of raising children. I don't know anything about the specific cases you are mentioning but I am sure that there are many unfair situations where men are getting the shaft, I bet though that there are also a lot of situations where men will complain that they are getting shafted even if the decision is a fair one. As for spousal support women usually don't get anywhere close to half of what the man makes and they are only eligible if there is a huge difference in what they make and if the reason this is so is directly related to the marriage situation. If a woman makes significantly more than the man because he sacrificed income to support the family then he is entitled to support, but if the two spouses both have good careers and can support themselves then nobody is eligible for spousal support. I think splitting assets in half is fair and pensions are considered family assets. If a woman has a pension and the man doesn't then her pension will be divided up. It's only fair. Overall I think there are people that have legitimate reasons to feel that they have been given a raw deal but overall I think what we hear is mostly griping because of bitter divorce settlements.