Poll: Do you consider yourself a feminist?

[AlphaLackey]

Feminism does not equal female superiority.

Does it equal "equality achieved by focusing solely on elevating the status of women?"

If yes, how does it propose to address pro-woman sexism en route to equality?
If no, then why call it "feminism" and not "egalitarianism"; after all, MLK was not a "Negroist"

 

[Zero=Interrupt]

I'm in favor of women's movement.

Especially when I'm standing behind it.

 

[Xojins]

Nope. I do believe in fair treatment but men and women are far from equal in modern urban culture.

 

[Woodsey]

Well yes, I support equal rights for men and women, but that's not quite the same definition as feminism.

Fortunately, its far less needed than it once was. Unfortunately, all you really have left carrying feminism are angry, ridiculously sexist women.

We should be looking at these things as people's right, not men's rights or women's rights or gay rights or whatever. If we segregated rights movements by race these days people would look at you like you're hideously behind the times.

 

[DanielBrown]

I think we should have equality, but sometimes I think it goes to far. I don't want to see firemen or police offices that got employed just because they were women(we even had ads in Sweden before where they specifically wanted foreign women). An old friend of mine also said that the requirements for becoming both a cop or fireman were different for men and women. If it's true, which sounds doubtful but still, it's just a step in the wrong direction.
Add: Some jobs are just more fitted for others. I wouldn't try to become a math teacher if I knew my math sucked incredibly bad(which it does).

Men should also get some attention. As it seems now, especially based on media, it's only women that have a hard time in life.

 

[moretimethansense]

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

Precisly, I have read (though I can't remember where so take this with a couple shakes of salt) that some sevices (fire department, paramedics, ect) were planning to lower the physical requrements for women.
That is to say that a man would be expected to be abe to lift an unconciouss person where a woman in the same position would not.
Now I can't confirm if there's any truth to this (or even if there is, if they scrapped it or not) but if it is true it makes me think that those in charge of those requirments are monkies, and not particularly well trained ones either.

 

[P.Tsunami]

I take umbridge with OP's definition of Feminism. By that definition of the term, most people would be, and I don't think it's a particularly useful way of defining the term. As a secular humanist, supporting basic equality and rights for everyone regardless of their gender, nationality or other identity traits, I obviously support equal rights for men and women. I do not believe that makes me a feminist, and as such I've voted "no".

I'll also add to the problematic definiton of Feminism: There are certainly branches of feminism who I'd argue do not believe in equal right for men and women. The most radical branches often seem to argue that women's rights are more important than men's rights. Does this mean they're not feminists? I wouldn't think so.

 

[Lilani]

I voted no, simply because of my personal definition of the word "feminist."

See, I think believing in equal gender rights is just sort of a "given." You don't need a special name for it, just as those who believe in equal racial rights don't have one (or at least are no longer referred to as "abolitionists.")

A feminist, on the other hand, is someone who believes that women are superior to men in some respects, and should be treated as such. Thus, not equal. Also, I feel there is quite a bit of vindictiveness in feminism. A feeling that us women should get some sort of recompense for the thousands of years we've been treated subserviently, which is completely ridiculous.

 

[Colour Scientist]

I wish a lot of people didn't explain it that way. x.x

I was not aware there was a LF though. :O

I think that's the problem.

The pay gap is commonly thought to be overstated, in the UK it's illegal to pay one sex more for the same job. The only problem is that when people look at individual cases it often turns out they're not the same job. One person will work more, work in tougher conditions or have bargained for more pay. I remember reading somewhere that a big component of the pay gap was that men were more willing to sacrifice their life for work and were more adept at negotiating pay rises, that's one of those tricky situations because it is 'judging everyone on their individual merits regardless of sex' but it looks like it's one of those things that comes more easily to men.

Well one of the major reasons behind it is the fear that women will need maternity leave, a lot of women who actually get the high up positions have passed menopause or aren't married.

I actually have, I'm chalking it up as a university thing though. To be honest I respect their passion but I consider it misplaced, insulting and counter-productive. If men as a group had a well designed, engaging and honest (no spin) explanation of feminism given to them I think most would agree with it. The problem is it's the nutcases who get the attention because they're interesting, the other problem being that I've never really seen a rebuttal of these people by 'true' feminists. It's a concern regardless of how rare they are because the worry about them is real and feminism as a movement needs to be more outward facing.

I'm in university I haven't had the same experience. The "nutcases" are challenged, quite regularly. It just isn't public because people just either don't hear it or don't want to hear it.

It's not unwillingness per se, it's more that it's not their place to do the background research for your explanation. I didn't mean that in an aggressive way, it'd be like giving a public talk on something and expecting the audience to have read up on the subject. Sooner or later you need to give some background. Fact of the matter is that the term 'feminism' has been hijacked...and very thoroughly at that.

It'd be like if someone formed an organisation called 'nice-ism' that was about being respectful and some people chose to interpret that as meaning respectful to everyone except Asians. They'll get the news coverage and the special articles because they're racist and it's interesting to read about. Well people will mix the two organisations up because they look superficially the same and that's not their fault, it's not their job to find out about it, it's that person's job to either say:

1. Those people are NOT nice-ists!
or
2. Fuck nice-ism, we're pleasantists!

Basically my entire standpoint can be boiled down to 'I refuse to reduce my opinion or a single word, especially not one that people can misunderstand.'

But it's almost impossible to have something like feminism without it getting some sort of title, which, will inevitably be interpreted.
It's like books getting categorised into genres. Say, a book is marketed and categorised as a romantic novel. It may not have all of the traits of a romantic novel but that's what people will perceive it as if they haven't read it and a lot of people will steer clear of it purely because of that label.

 

[trooper6]

I am male, and I consider myself feminist--though I also respect the viewpoint that I should call myself a "feminist ally" rather than "feminist."

 

[RanD00M]

No, I am an equalist. I believe in general equal rights, but I can also see that men are superior at certain tasks and vice versa.

 

[Haydyn]

Hello no. I'm okay with people wearing the Feminist shirts, but Feminism has nothing to do with equal rights, and that's why I am against it. If people were Masculinists, it would be seen as sexist. You can disagree with me all you want, but it's impossible to support Feninism when you know so many Feminists and all of them are sexist towards men. To hate someone based soley on their gender is sexist, and that's what a large portion of Feminists are.

I'm the first guy to say that women should be treated equal, payed equal, and have the freedom to choose a career. But Feminists are more sexist than any men I know. I am being judged just because I was born a certain gender. That's exactly what they claim is wrong, yet they do it anyways. To judge all men or all women one way is asinine and I shall have no part in it.

 

[Dango]

I believe in equality for men and women, so yes, but since I've never really done anything to further women's rights, I don't really consider myself an active feminist, so I answered no.

 

[John Funk]

Yes, and most people of sound mind and moral standard should be. Feminism does not mean misandry (hate for men) or that women should be superior, it means that women are not seen as, or treated as, equals for men even today, and that this is a bad thing that should be corrected.

If you think there's "no reason for feminism" in this day and age, you are wrong [http://www.weareequals.org/].

 

[Plurralbles]

I recognize that women have rights but I do nothing to further those ideals so therefore I am not.