Can a person genuinely oppose feminism and be authentically pro-women?

[danieldemol]

Last internet survey I conducted, I found about 2 dozen
flavors of feminism. Some are oppressive. Some are
libertarian. So my answer to the titular question is "yes".

What aspects of certain flavours of feminism do you find oppressive?

 

[danieldemol]

I've noticed that feminism itself has changed and shifted over the course of my lifetime. If we're defining feminism as the basic ideal of equality based within modern concepts of human rights, then I would consider myself pro-feminist.

However, I also view that equality comes with an equal set of rights and an equal set of responsibilities; it's neither "pro-woman" nor "pro-man." (It also can't be "pro-white" or "pro-black" or anything like that at all.)

What does "pro-woman" actually mean anyway? If there was a dispute between a Christian woman and an atheist man, should I have to side with the woman in order to be considered "pro-woman," or can I still side with the person whose views I agree with?

"Pro-women" was not defined by the gent in the other thread that inspired this one, but I think he meant having the best interests of women at heart when he said it. At least that's what I'm guessing he meant.

In my opinion.

 

[danieldemol]

When feminism turns itself into a political and philosophical ideology, and when it is becomes an inherently biased engine for advancing one particular favored group in society, then one can easily oppose it.

Does this mean you would see such things as affirmative action negatively instead of viewing it as necessary against the backdrop of a history of discrimination against women and minorities?

In my opinion.

 

[danieldemol]

If modern feminism is exclusively about imposing senatrix over senator...
Or it is about saying humankind instead of mankind, I do not identify with it.

Do you disagree with affirmative action?

Also why do you find saying humankind objectionable?

 

[Laika]

Well I mean there were actual Jews who supported Hitler. Hell there was even a gay Nazi. (Ernst Rohm.) Just because a person supports certain politics doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to end well for them specifically, if you get my drift?

People are complicated and will support regimes for a variety of complicated reasons. And yeah one of those reasons is self preservation. To prove that they are “one of the good ones.”
This is an actual phenomenon with historical precedent. Not that I’m accusing anyone here of having that reason for their political choices, mind you. Merely an observation of the broader world.

To be clear I’m not saying that women who supported Trump are anti woman or whatever. Just pointing out that internalised misogyny is a common talking point for feminists. (Also feminists of most stripes tend to support a woman choosing to be a housewife, provided that it’s entirely her own decision.)
And that a woman can absolutely support a position that to other people seems rather “anti woman.”
Just for example look at a person like Blaire White or Dave Rubin. They have been literally insulted to their faces by their supposed political allies. Blaire White was in a chat where a woman, supposedly on her political side, told her to and I quote “grow a moustache.” (Blaire is a trans woman.) Dave Rubin had Ben Shapiro on his show, supposedly a political ally and Ben literally told him he doesn’t support his marriage. If anything Blaire got more support from her political adversaries. Dave garnered sympathy from his adversaries. Albeit begrudgingly. (Dave is a gay man.)

Again I’m not saying that any woman or even minority group who votes Trump is some sort of traitor or anything of the sort. People are perfectly free to form their own opinions. I’m merely offering an observation that minority groups in the past and present have absolutely supported regimes that would kill them given half a chance. Hell they literally have. Rohm got “night of the long knives-ed” last I checked. And the Jews who supported Hitler thinking he was just stirring up the masses and didn’t mean it really. We both know what happened to those poor souls.
Infinitely tragic.

For reference just in case people are thinking I made this up. Jeez I wish
(Hopefully I got the right links)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernst_Röhm
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_German_National_Jews

When white nationalists see white people support racial equality, they call them “race traitors” and believe they are “ethno-masochists” driven by racial guilt and an inferiority complex. Thats not different to “internalised misogyny” or “internalised homophobia” or thinking black people who are conservative are “uncle toms”, etc.

So this idea of expecting people to support a cause, regardless of choice, individuality and experience, should be treated the same. People have the right to disagree as individuals, for their own reasons, without being presumed guilty of being traitors to causes they didn’t chose to support.

 

[SomeRandom]

When white nationalists see white people support racial equality, they call them “race traitors” and believe they are “ethno-masochists” driven by racial guilt and an inferiority complex. Thats not different to “internalised misogyny” or “internalised homophobia” or thinking black people who are conservative are “uncle toms”, etc.

So this idea of expecting people to support a cause, regardless of choice, individuality and experience, should be treated the same. People have the right to disagree as individuals, for their own reasons, without being presumed guilty of being traitors to causes they didn’t chose to support.

Oh I absolutely agree wholeheartedly. Like I said, it was merely an observation that minority groups can and do show support for all political parties, even ones that seemingly do not appear to be the most friendly towards them. But that’s politics. No group is a hive mind.

 

[Estro Felino]

Do you disagree with affirmative action?

Also why do you find saying humankind objectionable?

I do not think that the English Grammar is sexist, quite the opposite.
There are so many terms which indicate institutional professions (such as minister, president, senator) which are neutral, that is, valid for both genders. Which gives dignity to the institutional role, regardless of gender.

My mothertongue is a Romance language whose linguists are being obsessed (right now) with creating artificially the grammatical female equivalent for any profession (to give you an idea, in English it would be creating new words such as senatrix, writress, ministress instead of senator, writer, minister.). Reforms pushed by feminists.

So...I believe that grammar is not guilty of having certain neutral etymologies.
As for the word mankind, I am quite sure the etymology of man implies both man and woman, and is related to the etymology of Mensch (person, human being).
Since the word human comes from Latin humanus wich described both men and women, the species.

 

[Revoltingest]

What aspects of certain flavours of feminism do you find oppressive?

Some I recall....
- The ones who aren't sex positive.
- The ones who want big government to create equality of outcome.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Can a person genuinely oppose feminism and be authentically pro-women?

I would suppose the answer is yes, albeit with a bunch of assumptions and clarifications.

1) Feminism is a broad term covering a multitude of positions and theories, some of which I would oppose. Indeed, some of which other feminists oppose. No-one could agree with all feminist theories, and so I suspect everyone would oppose at least some minor aspects of feminism.

2) Some people hold to strictly egalitarian positions because they believe these will ultimately provide the best outcomes for all...including women. If talking about feminism only in a broad sense, I guess you might suggest these egalitarians could be opposed to feminism for ideological reasons. At least some of them would be. And yet they could very well be authentically pro-women.

For me personally, I self-describe as a feminist, but generally not very loudly, as the women in my life (RL) probably wouldn't be very impressed. And yet I have a hard time thinking they are not 'pro-women'.