Revisiting Feminism: INFJ (or other type) perspectives

[Thekakapo]

All my life, I've flip-flopped on feminism, and I was hoping to discuss with other people who identify as INFJ (or other types, if they would like) about an INFJ's (or just personal) relationship with feminism.

Most INFJs I know personally are "feminists," even the male INFJs. The only male INFJ I know who is not a feminist, also believes that it is bullsh*t that men can't be considered sensetive. (Which I think is slightly relevant, though not necessarily on topic).

Growing up, I disowned the word "feminism" because 1.) I believed that everyone was inherently equal so it was unthinkable that other people could believe otherwise 2.) everyone else used it as a dirty word, so I didn't want to deal with the associated conflict 3.) I had a fundemental misunderstanding about what it meant to be a feminist (and still might!), espeically since people use it in such different ways (and it therefore posesses mixed connotations) 4.) there was no overt necessity for thinking about it.

It was not until high school, when my honors biology teacher told me that I couldn't succeed in biology because I was a woman, did I realize that people out there actually really did believe that people posessed gender-associated traits and were therefore inequal. Since then, I have witnessed many examples of subtle to overt sexism in my own life, and the lives of my friends. I just finished reading "Fear of Flying" by Erica Jong and "Pavillion of Women" by Pearl S. Buck, which have served as catalysts for thinking deeper about feminism.

I want to hear from other people about their own experiences with feminism (whether for or against the label or whether they identify as male/female/neither/both), about books you've read that affected your views, or recent news items, anything related. Does anyone have insights related to culture, upbringing, news/media bias, etc.?


also: [video]http://www.upworthy.com/a-french-film-showing-men-what-being-a-woman-feels-like-kinda?g=2[/video]

 

[Elis]

With so many weird derivations of feminism I no longer really care for it. I won't call myself a feminist even if some of my thoughts align with its principles. I'd rather just call myself a humanist and agree with what I find think makes sense, then let people make whatever they want out of it.

I think people get too caught up in definitions and lose track of actual questions.

 

[the]

A person should not believe in an 'ism,' he should believe in himself.

 

[La Sagna]

I remember being a young girl and deciding that I didn't want to grow up to be a 'woman'. I'm not sure what brought that on but when I think about it now there must have been a negative connotation to being a 'woman' that I picked up somewhere.

I think people have the wrong idea about what feminism is supposed to be. Feminism is about women having equal rights. Because so many of the past battles for equal rights have been won in the Western World people forget that it was not very long ago that women were not allowed to own anything and were actually considered 'property' instead of equal human beings, and they also forget that in many parts of the World still today women are not even close to being equal. Feminism isn't about being just like men, or having more rights than men, or hating men, and if anybody says that it is then they are twisting it to fit their view.

Women are naturally more vulnerable than men for a variety of reasons so I do believe that it is important to fight for the rights of women around the world. Where women have full equal rights life is better for everybody.

http://www.upworthy.com/when-women-...-amazing-how-many-other-problems-are-resolved

 

[Thekakapo]

With so many weird derivations of feminism I no longer really care for it. I won't call myself a feminist even if some of my thoughts align with its principles. I'd rather just call myself a humanist and agree with what I find think makes sense, then let people make whatever they want out of it.

I think people get too caught up in definitions and lose track of actual questions.

Actually, I would agree that "humanist" is a more appropriate label (especially since the part 'feminin' is the part that really trips people up) but I would especially agree that it's a bad idea to get caught up in these definitions. That is, if I understand you correctly, you're referring to the pointlessness of labeling oneself? Although... I would argue that categories can be helpful when you're discussing political issues, if merely to more effectively communicate thoughts.

In your opinion what are the actual questions? Do you think these questions are asked by those who align themselves with the term "feminism"?

 

[tfg345i4u5lw]

I feel like a feminist but I don't even know what a feminist is. All I know is I love women, I love the way they look, I love the way they think, I love how they are all emotional and stuff. I love all these bitches so I guess that makes me a feminist.

 

[muir]

I think that women should have an equal say in the decision making process of their communities

I think however that men and women have certain biological differences and there also seems to be a difference in terms of cognitive functions (eg men are mostly thinking types and women are mostly feeling types)

We can say certain generalisations for example: men are physically stronger than women or that women are often better with young children

Such statments aren't going to be true for every individual but as rules of thumb they work in my experience (but there will of course be women who out perform some men physically and there will be men who are better than some women with young children)

I think that the process of creating a society where all have an equal say in the decision making process is not the sole responsibility of women but rather the responsibility of both sexes

However i think there is a group of people who are using 'feminism' as a trojan horse for their own agenda

Their agenda being to create a new society by destroying the old one. Their vision is for a centrally controlled world government where the many are ruled by a handful of people

These people use any disgruntled sections of the community (and fund them...see george soros's 'Open Society Institute' and its funding of feminism and other 'liberal' causes) as a tool to undermine the current society

For example they will fund civil rights, gay rights, womens rights and all this will make them seem like reasonable people because these are reasonable causes but they have an agenda beyond these causes...an agenda of control and the more they can pit people against each other be it women v's men or black v's white the more easy it will be for them to undermine the current fabric of society

They will piggy back feminism and then at the end of the line they will jump off its back and then grasp power leaving the bulk of men and women disenfranchised

edit:

influence of the frankfurt school:

[video=youtube;EjaBpVzOohs]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaBpVzOohs#t=23[/video]

i forgot to say that i think the sexes are supposed to compliment each other NOT compete with each other!

 

[say what]

I think feminism was important up until the feminist movement. Men and women are still not equal within a social context, but we're pretty close. I personally believe that the feminism now hinders women, often placing emphasis on a female's gender rather than abilities and competencies, and therefore dis-empowering females.

In contrast, I do think it's important to recognize the still prominent inequalities between the genders, and highlighting the patriarchal nature of society does fall under the feminist perspective. So I agree with the use of feminism in promoting inequalities, but not in equality.

Women shouldn't be congratulated for meeting traditional patriarchal standards just because they are women...they should be congratulated because they're awesome, regardless of their gender.

 

[La Sagna]

i forgot to say that i think the sexes are supposed to compliment each other NOT compete with each other!

I completely agree with this statement. It's not about competing, or about us vs them, it's simply helping everyone to be able to have the opportunity to live a decent life.

 

[muir]

Our society is currently run by men who form together in secret groups

They have a business network that is constantly consolidating into fewer but larger corporations and behind this they have a network of overlapping and interlocking secret societies

Obviously one large and well known society is the freemasons who act as an umbrella organisation

The freemasons are a male only order because they are a solar phallic cult

The catholic church are also a male only order because they too are a solar phallic cult

Here is the symbol of the jesuits:



The cross is a symbol of the tau or phallus; the sun too is seen as phallic emitting the suns rays to fertilise the land (mother earth)

Jesus is man (spirit) hung on the cross of matter. The 3 nails depicted are the 3 nails that pin us to the cross of matter. They represent the hebrew letter 'vav' which has the number 6; so 3 vav's spell: 666 (the number of the sun and of man)

The three 6's can also be seen on the front of the energy drink called 'monster'

There is no way that people can understand the forces at work in our society without digging down into the underlying stratas of our society

The ruling current at the moment is the 'male', patriarchal, solar, phallic, domineering current (unbalanced force) and it manifests in our reality in many ways including gender inequality

But it seems that the 'female' polarity is re-asserting itself

....well you did ask for other perspectives

 

[La Sagna]

I don't understand why people who are enlightened and educated would have a problem with feminism.

Definition of feminism:

Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.

Feminist theory, which emerged from feminist movements, aims to understand the nature of gender inequality by examining women's social roles and lived experience; it has developed theories in a variety of disciplines in order to respond to issues such as the social construction of sex and gender. Some of the earlier forms of feminism have been criticized for taking into account only white, middle-class, educated perspectives. This led to the creation of ethnically specific or multiculturalist forms of feminism.

Feminist activists campaign for women's rights – such as in contract law, property, and voting – while also promoting bodily integrity, autonomy, and reproductive rights for women. Feminist campaigns have changed societies, particularly in the West, by achieving women's suffrage, gender neutrality in English, equal pay for women, reproductive rights for women (including access to contraceptives and abortion), and the right to enter into contracts and own property. Feminists have worked to protect women and girls from domestic violence, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. They have also advocated for workplace rights, including maternity leave, and against forms of discrimination against women. Feminism is mainly focused on women's issues, but because feminism seeks gender equality, the author bell hooks and other feminists have argued that men's liberation is a necessary part of feminism and that men are also harmed by sexism and gender roles.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/daisy-lindlar/feminism_b_4787014.html

Amy Poehler is asked about feminism:

You’ve always made it clear that you’re a feminist. It’s a term that a lot of people back away from these days.

But then they go on to explain what they support and live by—it’s feminism exactly. I think some big actors and musicians feel like they have to speak to their audience and that word is confusing to their audience. But I don’t get it. That’s like someone being like, “I don’t really believe in cars, but I drive one every day and I love that it gets me places and makes life so much easier and faster and I don’t know what I would do without it.” But that’s everyone else’s trip, not mine. I had a mother who discovered herself in the ’70s and used to go to meetings and wear a sassy scarf.

 

[say what]

I don't understand why people who are enlightened and educated would have a problem with feminism.

Definition of feminism:

Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women. This includes seeking to establish equal opportunities for women in education and employment. A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women.

Feminist theory, which emerged from feminist movements, aims to understand the nature of gender inequality by examining women's social roles and lived experience; it has developed theories in a variety of disciplines in order to respond to issues such as the social construction of sex and gender. Some of the earlier forms of feminism have been criticized for taking into account only white, middle-class, educated perspectives. This led to the creation of ethnically specific or multiculturalist forms of feminism.

Feminist activists campaign for women's rights – such as in contract law, property, and voting – while also promoting bodily integrity, autonomy, and reproductive rights for women. Feminist campaigns have changed societies, particularly in the West, by achieving women's suffrage, gender neutrality in English, equal pay for women, reproductive rights for women (including access to contraceptives and abortion), and the right to enter into contracts and own property. Feminists have worked to protect women and girls from domestic violence, sexual harassment, and sexual assault. They have also advocated for workplace rights, including maternity leave, and against forms of discrimination against women. Feminism is mainly focused on women's issues, but because feminism seeks gender equality, the author bell hooks and other feminists have argued that men's liberation is a necessary part of feminism and that men are also harmed by sexism and gender roles.


http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/daisy-lindlar/feminism_b_4787014.html

Amy Poehler is asked about feminism:

Feminism came from constructivism...which suggest inequalities come from socially and culturally constructed ideologies. One can believe in feminism and that it has done fantastic things to marginalize the inequality between genders...but also believe that it no longer serves to benefit women (post-feminism). Because gender inequalities are socially constructed, they can change. Feminism changed the way society views women (at least in many places in the world), and has largely made both sexes equal. Therefore, post-feminism believes that gender inequality is largely non-existent, and therefore feminism isn't about empowering a group of individuals who are socially/culturally dis-empowered. I believe this is where feminist get their bad rap now- people think feminists believe women are better than men, etc. It's because feminism is being used incorrectly.

Constructivism still allows for issues associated with the dis-empowered to be addressed, some of which are issues that address women. I just tend to steer away from the term feminism, and like to stick to constructivism...as it suggests that there are many constructed ideologies that need to be changed in order to emancipate the disenfranchised.

 

[invisible]

when i was at university i read some truly fascinating 20th century feminist theory about the nature of gender and how the problems created by gender differences could be surmounted. some parts of that theory that was made at that time in history have not dated well. but however other parts that were very good and sound have never been understood on a cultural level. because i work in a bookstore i feel like i am in a special position to see the kinds of attitudes that come through about women, and i notice that the attitudes are not very good, and that material that is published for mass distribution that is directly related to feminist concerns is in actuality completely unfamiliar with that body of theory and the many concerns of feminism that are represented in it, even the most basic concerns. some of the excellent poststructuralist feminist theory of the 20th century has been distorted by the misunderstandings of currently working pop feminist writers who have been jeered at for their efforts with the additional result of this original theory being treated with dismissal.

what saddens me more is that the young feminist movement that is developing now through means such as social media and other mass media distribution, seems to experience very little interest at all in engaging with this wealth of previous theory, and to me this seems disrespectful of the massive work that has been done by previous generations of feminists. but then again they are still young and i think that this new part of the movement is just beginning to gather momentum so perhaps they will begin to rediscover over time. and of course they are the ones who have to set the agenda of current feminism and its possible that they are right that the real important thing is the pressing practical concerns that are in society now. what they want to do is to make women get equal pay in equal positions, and to stop the massive incidence of rape that is being committed on women in countries all across the wealth spectrum, and to address the massive number of deaths of women that happen as a result of gendered domestic violence as proportion of murders done. i dont think that anyone can make themselves aware of these sorts of matters and still believe that feminism is no longer relevant as a political movement for equality. surely these practical concerns are just as real and pressing as when women were trying to be allowed to vote, or to be allowed to be recognised as workers when not employed in maintaining household matters.

and then there is the gender movement of men who are clamouring to be heard about the restrictions of gendering on their own freedoms and personal developments. are they wrong too? is gender really no longer a problem in our society?

 

[bamf]

Because inequality still exists and because injustice still exists, I cannot think of myself as a socially conscious and active individual without also considering myself a feminist. We've made progress, but we're hardly post-gender, just like we're hardly post-racial. Shit is still fucked up.

 

[say what]

when i was at university i read some truly fascinating 20th century feminist theory about the nature of gender and how the problems created by gender differences could be surmounted. some parts of that theory that was made at that time in history have not dated well. but however other parts that were very good and sound have never been understood on a cultural level. because i work in a bookstore i feel like i am in a special position to see the kinds of attitudes that come through about women, and i notice that the attitudes are not very good, and that material that is published for mass distribution that is directly related to feminist concerns is in actuality completely unfamiliar with that body of theory and the many concerns of feminism that are represented in it, even the most basic concerns. some of the excellent poststructuralist feminist theory of the 20th century has been distorted by the misunderstandings of currently working pop feminist writers who have been jeered at for their efforts with the additional result of this original theory being treated with dismissal.

100000% how I feel!! That's why I stay away from feminism and lean more to constructivism. Feminism isn't what it was during the first or second movement, and has been manipulated and inaccurately used!

what saddens me more is that the young feminist movement that is developing now through means such as social media and other mass media distribution, seems to experience very little interest at all in engaging with this wealth of previous theory, and to me this seems disrespectful of the massive work that has been done by previous generations of feminists. but then again they are still young and i think that this new part of the movement is just beginning to gather momentum so perhaps they will begin to rediscover over time. and of course they are the ones who have to set the agenda of current feminism and its possible that they are right that the real important thing is the pressing practical concerns that are in society now. what they want to do is to make women get equal pay in equal positions, and to stop the massive incidence of rape that is being committed on women in countries all across the wealth spectrum, and to address the massive number of deaths of women that happen as a result of gendered domestic violence as proportion of murders done. i dont think that anyone can make themselves aware of these sorts of matters and still believe that feminism is no longer relevant as a political movement for equality. surely these practical concerns are just as real and pressing as when women were trying to be allowed to vote, or to be allowed to be recognised as workers when not employed in maintaining household matters.

and then there is the gender movement of men who are clamouring to be heard about the restrictions of gendering on their own freedoms and personal developments. are they wrong too? is gender really no longer a problem in our society?

I see these as a result of a patriarchal system the is entrenched in upper class white-ism. These things don't just happen because you're a woman, they happen because you're a minority, in poverty, single parent, ESL, young adult / older adult...the list goes on. Feminism today focuses on these issues through the basis of gender- and it's not just gender...and this is where I have the issue with it.

 

[ThomasJ79]

Humans exhibit sexual dimorphism, which is also seen in apes and monkeys. This means that there are distinct difference between men and women. On average men are larger than women, but just because the average male is physically stronger than the average female does not mean that all males are stronger than all females. There is some overlap. Think of a bimodal distribution with overlap on a graph. This can apply to other traits as well. I think it is entirely reasonable to allow men and women to perform tasks that they are good at, while recognizing their differences. On overall intelligence studies, men and women show little difference, although on specific cognitive abilities there seems to be certain areas where the sexes perform better than the opposite sex. I approve of any feminism that is willing to look at the facts when stating their case and every man and woman should be given the chance to prove that they are capable of performing jobs they excel at over others.

 

[La Sagna]

Feminism came from constructivism...which suggest inequalities come from socially and culturally constructed ideologies. One can believe in feminism and that it has done fantastic things to marginalize the inequality between genders...but also believe that it no longer serves to benefit women (post-feminism). Because gender inequalities are socially constructed, they can change. Feminism changed the way society views women (at least in many places in the world), and has largely made both sexes equal. Therefore, post-feminism believes that gender inequality is largely non-existent, and therefore feminism isn't about empowering a group of individuals who are socially/culturally dis-empowered. I believe this is where feminist get their bad rap now- people think feminists believe women are better than men, etc. It's because feminism is being used incorrectly.

Constructivism still allows for issues associated with the dis-empowered to be addressed, some of which are issues that address women. I just tend to steer away from the term feminism, and like to stick to constructivism...as it suggests that there are many constructed ideologies that need to be changed in order to emancipate the disenfranchised.

Looking at issues through constructivism solely would be fine if there weren't inherently gender-based issues that cannot be denied. Because women are the ones who get pregnant and give birth and because they are physically and sexually more vulnerable than men makes these 100% gender-based issues and ignoring that because it feels 'politically incorrect' does not help to create equality.

Whoever believes that gender-inequality is non-existent is looking through a very narrow lens that doesn't include the majority of the world's women. It is true that in the Western world many gender issues have been greatly improved and does not warrant the level of concern that was required in the past but I tend to think more globally and I am acutely aware that there are many places in the world where gender-inequality greatly affects the quality of life of women and girls. 'But for the grace of God' that could have been me if I had been born somewhere else where women don't have the same rights as I do here.

http://listverse.com/2013/03/16/10-reasons-we-still-need-feminism/

http://www.globalissues.org/article/166/womens-rights

 

[La Sagna]

I think just like some people have co-opted 'Christianity' to twist it to fit their 'Us vs Them' mentally, some women have co-opted 'feminism' to resemble their 'Us vs Them' mentality. That doesn't make feminism wrong it makes the women who have twisted it to become a tool for divisiveness the ones who are wrong.

 

[say what]

Looking at issues through constructivism solely would be fine if there weren't inherently gender-based issues that cannot be denied. Because women are the ones who get pregnant and give birth and because they are physically and sexually more vulnerable than men makes these 100% gender-based issues and ignoring that because it feels 'politically incorrect' does not help to create equality.

Whoever believes that gender-inequality is non-existent is looking through a very narrow lens that doesn't include the majority of the world's women. It is true that in the Western world many gender issues have been greatly improved and does not warrant the level of concern that was required in the past but I tend to think more globally and I am acutely aware that there are many places in the world where gender-inequality greatly affects the quality of life of women and girls. 'But for the grace of God' that could have been me if I had been born somewhere else where women don't have the same rights as I do here.

http://listverse.com/2013/03/16/10-reasons-we-still-need-feminism/

http://www.globalissues.org/article/166/womens-rights

I see what you're saying, but my opinion is that looking at it through a gender-inequality lens is narrow- issues of deprivation, injustice and inequalities go far beyond a gender issue. I personally don't think feminism today can effectively capture the issues society faces, particularly women. Being a woman today means I have far more rights and opportunities than I had 20 years ago...but being a woman today doesn't mean I don't face injustices.

 

[La Sagna]

I see what you're saying, but my opinion is that looking at it through a gender-inequality lens is narrow- issues of deprivation, injustice and inequalities go far beyond a gender issue. I personally don't think feminism today can effectively capture the issues society faces, particularly women. Being a woman today means I have far more rights and opportunities than I had 20 years ago...but being a woman today doesn't mean I don't face injustices.

Feminism is narrow, that's the point. It is focusing on the problems of females in particular. It should not be used to diminish other social issues that are separate from specific women's issues but I see nothing wrong with having a branch of constructivism that deals specifically with women's issues, like there should a branch for men's issues, children's issues, racial issues (divided into specific issues for particular racial groups), sexual-orientation issues...you get the idea. I see it as just a way to subdivide the big issues into more specific areas to be able to deal with them in a more effective manner.

Feminism doesn't come even close to capturing all of today's issues but it can help with specific issues regarding a very large segment of society. I would fully support any group that studies any other specific issues, as long as it is done in a constructive way that doesn't denigrate another group (that goes for feminism as well).