Poll: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

[moretimethansense]

The problem is, that isn't what feminism is anymore.

I prefer the term equalist.

Damn, my view has already been claimed by another

Feminism is not interested in equality for all, it is interested in equality for women. To clarify, no feminist is attempting to make equal areas in which women hold the advantage, only areas in which men do

I also like the term equalist, as I feel that anyone should have an equal chance at doing anything, depending on their own merits. Basically, as long as people aren't discriminated against based on their genetic make-up, it's all good

This, by the definition in the OP I would say yes, but that's not the definition in real life, I too count myself as an equalist.

Though I think discrimniation in jobs is acceptable if the person would have a genuine disadvantage due to their genetcs, IE a blind surgeon, a wheelchair bound courier or a black undercover agent whoose job would be to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan.

 

[Queen Michael]

I consider women to be people, so yeah.

 

[Dethpixie]

I prefer to consider my self a humanist... or a nihilist, varies by the day really.

 

[SenseOfTumour]

Part of the problem is that men and women just ARE different, so equality is a difficult thing to just apply in every way.

For instance, it's not widely acceptable for men to go completely mental for a few days a month. (I kid, I kid!)

But, how should equality be handled when it comes to paternity leave from work, they didn't actually give birth, but should they be left out of the first few weeks of their child's life because they don't have a womb? On the other hand, should they be given the same amount of time as a woman, considering they (in the traditional sense), probably won't be the one staying home to look after him or her.

Also, there's jobs like construction, where physical strength and stamina are vital to the job. Should a woman have equal rights to getting the job when she may well not be able to carry as much or work for as long without a break? (even that sounds sexist, but I just mean to draw attention to the difference between equality and actually being the same.)

 

[gmaverick019_v1legacy]

I understand that it is always the worst of a particular group that is the most vocal, but my views of feminists has been damaged a fair bit over time. Don't get me wrong, I believe everyone is equal and should have equal rights, but most of the feminists I come across seem to want more rights for women and less rights for men.
For example, a woman in my town who is a very vocal feminist will blow her top at the most courteous men for doing harmless things, and she never seems to be happy about the way she is treated. One day a man might hold a door open for her, and it's "How dare you! You think I'm incapable of opening a door because I'm a woman!?". The next day someone might do the opposite and she claims they're rude and un-chivalrous. She's a mad witch.
Equality is always a good thing, though..

yeah same here, i'm left with a nasty taste in my mouth of confusion on wtf just happened


based on the OP's definition, then hell yes i am a feminist, but based on what i have experienced? no, not at all.

 

[k-ossuburb]

I'm into equal rights for everyone.

Unless you're a robot or a zombie... or a robot zombie.

 

[varulfic]

"Feminist" is the worst word ever, because the word doesn't mean anything. You say you're a feminist, you've told me absolutely nothing about what you stand for. Everyone is a feminist, everyone, because the definition is so loose that everybody fits under it. If you're really going to call yourself a feminist then please, be more specific - Are you a liberal feminist? Social? Radical? The different forms cover the entire political spectrum, you can't put them all in the same category.

 

[Flatfrog]

For the sake of this pole, I'm talking about "Liberal Feminism". Roughly meaning you support equal rights for men and women.

Well surely by that definition you'd have to be a total dick to say no. I think that's a fair distance short of what I'd call feminism. (FWIW, I'm in the Male, yes camp, and would be by a lot more radical definition too!)

It does seem that way, doesn't it?

Just to push this point further, it would be perfectly possible and logically consistent to argue that women are less intelligent, morally inferior and worse-dressed than men, and *still* to say they deserve equal rights! Hell, some people are campaigning for equal rights for chimpanzees.

Surely feminism has to at the very least include the belief that women have equal *worth* as well as rights. (I'm using worth as a broad catch-all term to include all abilities - it avoids issues like measures of IQ which are mostly meaningless in my opinion)

I'd also follow up on this:

All that said, I believe people are people and should be judged on an individual basis. The less annoying a person or group makes themselves to me, the more I tend to like and support them.

This seems self-contradictory. Surely if you're judging people individually (a sentiment I heartily agree with) then you shouldn't be judging how annoying a 'group' is and deciding whether to support 'them'. For example, who is 'them' in the case of 'feminists'? There are loads of feminist thinkers out there, and each of them makes some good points and some bad ones. And beyond them there is the huge array of people, male and female, who consider themselves feminist and have never done anything to annoy you personally.

 

[CactiComplex]

But, how should equality be handled when it comes to paternity leave from work, they didn't actually give birth, but should they be left out of the first few weeks of their child's life because they don't have a womb? On the other hand, should they be given the same amount of time as a woman, considering they (in the traditional sense), probably won't be the one staying home to look after him or her.

Also, there's jobs like construction, where physical strength and stamina are vital to the job. Should a woman have equal rights to getting the job when she may well not be able to carry as much or work for as long without a break? (even that sounds sexist, but I just mean to draw attention to the difference between equality and actually being the same.)

To be honest, I never gave much thought to paternity leave before, but I think they're just as entitled as woman. It is their child after all. I'm not entirely sure how much leave women get, but men should be offered an equal amount. Both have the right to refuse it or have shorter leave, do they not? If not, I think they should.

As far as jobs go, I'd think common sense should be applied by the individuals applying for them. If you're a physically fit woman and you know you're capable then by all means go for a construction job, if you're not, then don't.

Btw, I didn't think that last comment was sexist at all, unless pointing out biological truths (strength etc) has become sexist... which some people seem to think is true. Crazy, really. If everyone wants equality, we need to know our limits as far as these things go.

 

[ZydrateDealer]

No but only because I feel that I shouldn't be labeled for my beliefs. Women should have the same rights as men, they shouldn't have more...and they currently do have the same rights so why are there still feminists?

 

[b3nn3tt]

The problem is, that isn't what feminism is anymore.

I prefer the term equalist.

Damn, my view has already been claimed by another

Feminism is not interested in equality for all, it is interested in equality for women. To clarify, no feminist is attempting to make equal areas in which women hold the advantage, only areas in which men do

I also like the term equalist, as I feel that anyone should have an equal chance at doing anything, depending on their own merits. Basically, as long as people aren't discriminated against based on their genetic make-up, it's all good

This, by the definition in the OP I would say yes, but that's not the definition in real life, I too count myself as an equalist.

Though I think discrimniation in jobs is acceptable if the person would have a genuine disadvantage due to their genetcs, IE a blind surgeon, a wheelchair bound courier or a black undercover agent whoose job would be to infiltrate the Ku Klux Klan.

Good point, but then they're actually being judged on their suitability for the job, which is really how it should be anyway. The black agent isn't being denied a job because they're black, it's because they would absolutely not be right for the job. This is why I find it incredibly annoying whenever I hear a study of someone being denied a job, or something, and then playing some kind of 'I'm being discriminated against just because I'm X' card. No, you just aren't a good choice

 

[Colour Scientist]

Think we're a bit blurry on the definition of feminist. Someone who thinks everyone should be treated equally couldn't really be called a feminist to be honest. That's like saying, if you flip it over to the opposite side, that a shovonist wants equal rights... Not exactly the first thing that pops into people's heads.

Pretty much everyone in our culture wants equal rights.

It's a very general description of it. I didn't think anyone would read it if I branched off into Essentialist and non-essentialist feminist postitions or the gender vs. sex debate. I gave it in a really bare sense because, to be honest, I didn't think too many people would be interested.

When most hear the word 'feminism' eye-rolling ensues.

 

[Fetzenfisch]

Against feminism , for equalism.



Damn women got 2 special rooms at uni just to hang out and we didnt even get a single gentlemens club? ha! kiss my shiny metal ass feminists

 

[Colour Scientist]

Not at all.

I'm all for gender equality and such, but i'm ALWAYS annoyed when feminists come up with something new to be angry about.

And i'm especially annoyed about the concept of women quotas, wich is currently a topic again here in germany ( http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,742708,00.html ). Forcing something like that does not give me the impression that it's just a different kind of discrimination/seperation, and kind of ridiculous if you think about it logically.
(Although i admit that it doesn't help that Ursula Von der Leyen is spearheading this whole thing for me personally)

That's not feminism though, I'm totally opposed to employing women just for the sake of them being women. Women need to earn their place, just as much as men.

 

[babinro]

I try to base my life around the concept of equality...be it via gender, race, employment decisions, religious view, social expectations, etc. Everyone deserves a fair chance.

So based on the polls definition, I'm very much a male feminist.

I should note, that feeling everyone deserves an equal chance in no way means that I support reverse discrimination. The idea of encouraging a company to hire certain genders or races to give the impression of equality is far worse than actually hiring the best person and paying them accordingly.

 

[Colour Scientist]

No. Feminism means thinking that there needs to be political action to 'correct' a sexist agenda, not just that men and women are equal.
I also don't think women should be allowed to serve in combat infantry regiments.

Not necessarily, it did in the 70s when it started but from the 90s there has been a movement away from politically motivated feminism.

 

[Zaverexus]

In this sense:

I'm talking about "Liberal Feminism". Roughly meaning you support equal rights for men and women.

yes

In this one:

a negative term to descibe angry women who hate men but in a vast majority of cases this is not so. The word has become so associated with "man hating" and bra burning that even most women will shy away from the label.

No, and the people who go this extreme annoy me greatly

 

[infohippie]

I hope the majority of males that voted 'no' simply don't know what feminism actually is.
Otherwise, I am disappoint.

I'm a male who chose "no" and I did read the whole post. I consider myself, like so many others here, an "equalist" or "humanist." I chose no because I cannot bring myself to use the label "feminist". I think the label itself is sexist and demeaning, thanks to the vocal radical feminists who have co-opted the term over the years.