What exactly is feminism and why do some oppose it?

[Nakosis]

I was just thinking about how some people feel justified in criticizing men like Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and a segment of other similar type men, but some people don't feel justified in criticizing guys like Justin Treadou, Barack Obama and a lot of other intellectual men and I was curious what the root of this is, and I thought something profound...

Guys like Trump and Putin seem to be the opposite of feminists.

...So is it actually true, that Trump, being viewed as the opposite of a feminist, is ultimately his greatest weakness as a Western politician..?

Please remember that this is a nondebate forum.

I think women should have the same rights as men. I'm not sure realistically how much can be done beyond that.
Women should be allowed to pursue whatever role they want. I'm not sure about equal treatment though. How I treat people depends a lot on them. I treat them as individuals. As individuals are different, I treat them differently. It would be wrong IMO to even try to treat everyone the same. I wouldn't want to be treated the same as Joe down the street. Joe may be an *******.

There seems to be a trend among the women I come in contact with which is different than how most men I run into want to be treated. More of a cultural thing but I don't think I ought to be the one altering culture to suit my ideas.

So legal, equal rights, great.

Culture is more fluid and tends to have a life of its own.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Can't be bothered trying to understand all the various types of feminism out there. I believe, quite simply, that all humans (male, female and those who haven't entirely decided) are in every way that matters except in procreation, entitled to be who they wish to be, live as they wish to live, have the same justice as everyone else, have the same opportunities as anyone (provided they can meet the requirements), and so on.

As it happens, I am male. I also happen to be gay, and really like men. But my doctor today is a woman, because I trust her. My doctor before her (going back 35 years now) was also a woman, and I trusted her. This is also true of my dentist, and my previous dentist -- both women.

The member of Parliament for my riding is a woman, and I have been voting for her for years and years -- because I trust her.

As a hiring manager (VP of IT for a major insurance company), I always insisted that the first view I had of resumes had the name, gender and ethnic background of the candidate was removed before my managers first reviewed them, so that they would be making their initial assessment based merely on accomplishment. I always thought the temptation to look at irrelevancies could be pretty strong.

 

[Revoltingest]

Can't be bothered trying to understand all the various types of feminism out there. I believe, quite simply, that all humans (male, female and those who haven't entirely decided) are in every way that matters except in procreation, entitled to be who they wish to be, live as they wish to live, have the same justice as everyone else, have the same opportunities as anyone (provided they can meet the requirements), and so on.

As it happens, I am male. I also happen to be gay, and really like men. But my doctor today is a woman, because I trust her. My doctor before her (going back 35 years now) was also a woman, and I trusted her. This is also true of my dentist, and my previous dentist -- both women.

The member of Parliament for my riding is a woman, and I have been voting for her for years and years -- because I trust her.

As a hiring manager (VP of IT for a major insurance company), I always insisted that the first view I had of resumes had the name, gender and ethnic background of the candidate was removed before my managers first reviewed them, so that they would be making their initial assessment based merely on accomplishment. I always thought the temptation to look at irrelevancies could be pretty strong.

So....do you have any faults?
Or should we hate you?

Btw, notice how I observed propriety by
not questioning what you meant by "riding".

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

So....do you have any faults?
Or should we hate you?

Btw, notice how I observed propriety by
not questioning what you meant by "riding".

Tons of faults, and you can hate me if you'd like, though it will avail you little, since I won't care. I drink too much beer (never anything stronger), and refuse to cut it out. I like taking a slightly subtle poke at those who don't think as rationally as I think I do (though I've had to curtail that a bit, in deference to zealous Mods). I can quote quite literally thousands of lines of Shakespeare, although my lover adamantly refuses me permission to do so in his presence.

Btw, notice how I observed propriety by
not questioning what you meant by "riding".

It's a local Canuckistanism -- basically equivalent to an electoral district, or if you happen to be in Scotland, constituency.

 

[Revoltingest]

Tons of faults, and you can hate me if you'd like, though it will avail you little, since I won't care. I drink too much beer (never anything stronger), and refuse to cut it out. I like taking a slightly subtle poke at those who don't think as rationally as I think I do (though I've had to curtail that a bit, in deference to zealous Mods). I can quote quite literally thousands of lines of Shakespeare, although my lover adamantly refuses me permission to do so in his presence.

It's a local Canuckistanism -- basically equivalent to an electoral district, or if you happen to be in Scotland, constituency.

OK, I won't hate you.
But I reserve the right to change my mind.

 

[Stevicus]

Do you know the difference between a prostitute & a lawyer?

A prostitute will stop screwing you after you're dead?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Do you know the difference between a prostitute & a lawyer?

Do you know the difference between a circus acrobatic troop and the Radio City Rockettes chorus line?

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you know the difference between a circus acrobatic troop and the Radio City Rockettes chorus line?

I do not.
But I do know the difference between a women's track team & a tribe of pygmies.
(The answer wouldn't even survive being hidden behind a spoiler.)

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I do not.
But I do know the difference between a women's track team & a tribe of pygmies.
(The answer wouldn't even survive being hidden behind a spoiler.)

The answer to mine is "one is a cunning array of ..." well, I must leave the rest to the imagination.

 

[Cherub786]

I'm interested in discussing the feminist critique of Religion. Being a religious person, I want to defend my theology and praxis from the criticism of feminists, particularly their charge that Religion, and Islam in particular, is patriarchal. Yes, to an extent my religion is patriarchal, but if the alternative to patriarchy is matriarchy is that really any different?
These days feminist activists are campaigning against and raising awareness about the problem of sexual harassment of women. I completely agree with them in this. I also agree with many brave feminists who are critical of the transgender movement and its attempt to redefine female. Posie Parker comes to mind. These feminists are derisively labelled TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist). I wish to make common cause with the so-called TERFs in their battle to protect the definition of female and to safeguard women and girls from predatory transgenders who are encroaching on their private space (public bathrooms and change rooms). Has anyone heard of the transgender predator Jessica Yaniv? I think its people like that who are the real "radicals" and not the ironically labeled TERFs.

 

[SomeRandom]

I'm interested in discussing the feminist critique of Religion. Being a religious person, I want to defend my theology and praxis from the criticism of feminists, particularly their charge that Religion, and Islam in particular, is patriarchal. Yes, to an extent my religion is patriarchal, but if the alternative to patriarchy is matriarchy is that really any different?
These days feminist activists are campaigning against and raising awareness about the problem of sexual harassment of women. I completely agree with them in this. I also agree with many brave feminists who are critical of the transgender movement and its attempt to redefine female. Posie Parker comes to mind. These feminists are derisively labelled TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist). I wish to make common cause with the so-called TERFs in their battle to protect the definition of female and to safeguard women and girls from predatory transgenders who are encroaching on their private space (public bathrooms and change rooms). Has anyone heard of the transgender predator Jessica Yaniv? I think its people like that who are the real "radicals" and not the ironically labeled TERFs.

On the bathroom thing. 3 things.
1. There’s no force field around changing rooms or public bathrooms that automatically prevents predators from entering them anyway. So I don’t see how it’s logical to assume that a stick figure picture wearing a triangular “dress” would magically keep out anyone who is a predator. I have a feeling this is why many girls go to the public bathroom in groups anyway. For eons now.
2. Being trans doesn’t magically make a person free of any flaws. Some can be predators just as some cis individuals can be.
And 3. I’m not going to the public bathroom to inspect other people’s genitals. So why would I care if the person next to my stall is trans, cis or otherwise?

On the redefinition of womanhood. I think it’s far more interesting to explore beyond the stale black and white notions of a strict binary. When that model hasn’t been recognised as such in the sciences for literally decades. To my knowledge anyway

 

[Cherub786]

I’m not sure the third wave is like that. A few maybe. I was very critical of the third wave for a while.
But I don’t actually know of feminists of any wave who discounts being a housekeeper or mother. Simply that that should be a woman’s choice. Though one could argue that capitalism has certainly helped to “re prioritise” family and career life balance for, well, everyone.

It has to be admitted the most recent waves of feminism are quite critical of the traditional family structure - that structure being self evidently good and constructive for society. Its breakdown is indisputably one of the major factors for the social problems that are only getting worse.

The sexual revolution of the 1960s was also a consequence of feminist thinking becoming mainstream. No one can deny that from a religious perspective (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), the sexual revolution was a disaster and a repudiation of our traditional morality and ethics.

Regrettably, the very first wave of feminism actually laid the foundation for the subsequent waves and their disastrous effects on society and morality, even if the first feminists like Susan B. Anthony didn't intend for that to happen.

 

[SomeRandom]

It has to be admitted the most recent waves of feminism are quite critical of the traditional family structure - that structure being self evidently good and constructive for society. Its breakdown is indisputably one of the major factors for the social problems that are only getting worse.

The sexual revolution of the 1960s was also a consequence of feminist thinking becoming mainstream. No one can deny that from a religious perspective (Judaism, Christianity, Islam), the sexual revolution was a disaster and a repudiation of our traditional morality and ethics.

Regrettably, the very first wave of feminism actually laid the foundation for the subsequent waves and their disastrous effects on society and morality, even if the first feminists like Susan B. Anthony didn't intend for that to happen.

Which traditional family structure? The communal one from centuries past? Where 3 or more generations lived together?

Or the so called “nuclear family” which was essentially invented as wartime propaganda during the Cold War? Not to say such structures didn’t exist before that. But it wasn’t the only “traditional” one around.

And we have moved beyond what Susan B Anthony could even imagine. We did that during the second wave even. Like arguably the whole civil rights thing.

Forgive me, but this sounds like the same tired old hand wringing about the end of the West that has been in discourse since before slavery was made illegal.

 

[Cherub786]

On the bathroom thing. 3 things.
1. There’s no force field around changing rooms or public bathrooms that automatically prevents predators from entering them anyway. So I don’t see how it’s logical to assume that a stick figure picture wearing a triangular “dress” would magically keep out anyone who is a predator. I have a feeling this is why many girls go to the public bathroom in groups anyway. For eons now.
2. Being trans doesn’t magically make a person free of any flaws. Some can be predators just as some cis individuals can be.
And 3. I’m not going to the public bathroom to inspect other people’s genitals. So why would I care if the person next to my stall is trans, cis or otherwise?

On the redefinition of womanhood. I think it’s far more interesting to explore beyond the stale black and white notions of a strict binary. When that model hasn’t been recognised as such in the sciences for literally decades. To my knowledge anyway

You give less credit to predators than they deserve. They aren't bumbling cavemen who just go around molesting people. They tend to be crafty and sly, and wish to take advantage of the law to facilitate their predatory behavior.
You need only examine the case of Jessica Yaniv. Here is a middle aged man who became a transgender and then deliberately targeted waxing salons and agencies in Vancouver that are run by immigrant women (mostly Sikh Punjabis who tend to locally dominate that profession). She demanded that they wax "her" genitals. When they politely refused on the basis that they aren't trained to wax male genitals, and more to the point, they aren't comfortable doing so, she immediately filed complaints against them through the human rights tribunal of British Columbia province. In fact, she forced some of them out of business, because those women would rather close their business than be compelled by law not to discriminate against transgenders if the latter means they have to wax male genitals.
So my point is these laws that are being legislated in the spirit of "progress" and "social justice" are definitely being exploited by predators as a means of them legally accessing women and girls they wish to victimize.

 

[Cherub786]

Which traditional family structure? The communal one from centuries past? Where 3 or more generations lived together?

Or the so called “nuclear family” which was essentially invented as wartime propaganda during the Cold War? Not to say such structures didn’t exist before that. But it wasn’t the only “traditional” one around.

Both structures are traditional, in fact they are the almost the same, the difference being only due to economic circumstances.

 

[Cherub786]

On the redefinition of womanhood. I think it’s far more interesting to explore beyond the stale black and white notions of a strict binary. When that model hasn’t been recognised as such in the sciences for literally decades. To my knowledge anyway

I absolutely disagree, the science is very clear that there is a strict biological binary of male and female. Now as for neurological and psychological studies, that is your opening, however narrow I think it might be, but you definitely don't have an opening as far as the biology is concerned.

 

[SomeRandom]

I absolutely disagree, the science is very clear that there is a strict biological binary of male and female. Now as for neurological and psychological studies, that is your opening, however narrow I think it might be, but you definitely don't have an opening as far as the biology is concerned.

Sex distribution is bimodal in our species, though. But “womanhood” is most definitely up for exploration.

 

[SomeRandom]

You give less credit to predators than they deserve. They aren't bumbling cavemen who just go around molesting people. They tend to be crafty and sly, and wish to take advantage of the law to facilitate their predatory behavior.
You need only examine the case of Jessica Yaniv. Here is a middle aged man who became a transgender and then deliberately targeted waxing salons and agencies in Vancouver that are run by immigrant women (mostly Sikh Punjabis who tend to locally dominate that profession). She demanded that they wax "her" genitals. When they politely refused on the basis that they aren't trained to wax male genitals, and more to the point, they aren't comfortable doing so, she immediately filed complaints against them through the human rights tribunal of British Columbia province. In fact, she forced some of them out of business, because those women would rather close their business than be compelled by law not to discriminate against transgenders if the latter means they have to wax male genitals.
So my point is these laws that are being legislated in the spirit of "progress" and "social justice" are definitely being exploited by predators as a means of them legally accessing women and girls they wish to victimize.

So one ******* is enough to discredit transgender people as a whole?
I’ve worked with the public. I have a plethora of horror stories about human nature if you like. And I certainly don’t want to be associated with the disgusting things I’ve witnessed straight cis women do.
And most predators won’t care about stick figures on the doors.
I need something more logical than one jerk being a jerk. Because guess what? Many predators can also take advantage of babysitting gigs. Guess we should ban all nannies because of some predatory *******. Right?
The line of reasoning just seems rather illogical to me.

 

[Cherub786]

you seem to have a very limited, biased view of gender

Well then, help me to broaden my horizons

 

[SomeRandom]

Both structures are traditional, in fact they are the almost the same, the difference being only due to economic circumstances.

And?
Things change. It’s not the end of the world