Thread: Male Feminists

Indeed he is. Quite interesting and funny.

Is that all you do? Watch feminism themed videos on youtube? Lol

Regarding the subject.. Usually when I have to remove aggressive women from the bar ( as security ) people often criticize it with lines like : "You can't be that rough to a woman!".
Point one, I can if they are clawing my eyes out, biting and trying to repeatetly kick me in my groin. Point two : that is equality. I treat them as I treat male customers.

The feminist won.

Lmao, this guy.

I don't get it. What do you want with this thread?

I don't get it either. He didn't say anything intelligent.

And egalitarianism is obvious, boring, old hat.

Since when do gay guy's opinions count?

Originally Posted by Seroquel

Is that all you do? Watch feminism themed videos on youtube? Lol

LOL, no, I do many things and watch many things on YouTube, and sometimes I do watch feminist videos because I happen to be a girl who has actual self-respect and ambitions, despite my apparent lack of a penis. But thanks, really, for stereotyping me and making belittling, baseless assumptions.

Originally Posted by Unelias

Regarding the subject.. Usually when I have to remove aggressive women from the bar ( as security ) people often criticize it with lines like : "You can't be that rough to a woman!".
Point one, I can if they are clawing my eyes out, biting and trying to repeatetly kick me in my groin. Point two : that is equality. I treat them as I treat male customers.

The feminist won.

What makes you think she was a feminist? Most women who think women should be treated extra nice are also the ones who are old-fashioned and think that women should be taken care of, become housewives and stay at home raising children with their rich doctor husband. They don't identify as "feminists", in fact know as little about it as the vast majority. I think you did the right thing in treating them logically and equally.

What, is feminism the new boogeyman? The new scapegoat for everything bad that happens, because nothing's more threatening and scary to society than a woman who isn't an object and a doormat?

He makes a valid point, that especially in the media, they are still trying to perpetuate old-fashioned ideas that men's stories are far more interesting than women's, so that there are vastly more male characters than female (even though women make up roughly half of the population), and men can be anything they want regardless of appearance but women should only be sexy, most importantly, and love interests. We would NEVER, EVER get away with the same amount of racism, why should we with sexism? Are we supposed to just ignore it and shut up (and go make sandwiches)? Unless the mods think otherwise and want to close this thread, I think the subject of feminism and gender equality is well worth talking about and bringing into the open, because few people want to admit these observations.

I'm sick of the assumptions that feminism (the idea that women are EQUAL to men, not better or worse) is about man-hating and being a hairy ugly lesbian (that's what conservatives have successfully indoctrinated people into thinking so that women are silenced from progressing any further). Anyone who thinks that women and men are equal is technically a feminist, male or female, gay or straight, adult or child.

By the way, men being constantly pressured to fit into the male gender role of being strong, not having emotions, not doing anything remotely "gay" (because gay is so evil and against gender norms) is also sexism. I tend to think that homophobia and sexism go hand in hand.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

LOL, no, I do many things and watch many things on YouTube, and sometimes I do watch feminist videos because I happen to be a girl who has actual self-respect and ambitions, despite my apparent lack of a penis. But thanks, really, for stereotyping me and making belittling, baseless assumptions.

I think you misunderstood what Unelias meant Deery...

When he said "The feminist won" I think he meant in the general sense - that they've won and he's treating women truly equally with men.

Also, I disagree with some of the stereotypes you're perpetuating above - in particular that men can be anything they want in movies/TV shows and women are forced to be sexy. It seems to me when that stereotype first started it was because women were always portrayed as weak screamers to be rescued by (sexy) male heroes. Now we have probably as many sexy female heroes as sexy male heroes, or very close. As well as countless shows portraying husbands as dumbasses who couldn't even tie their shoes without their smarter wives telling them how.

Male fantasy tends to express itself through images of strength and violence... as heroes basically. So you have the "guy movies". But women also have their "chick flicks". I think fantasy movies for women are romances.

I tend to agree with Europeans who have said "American women want to be men, and they want their men to be women".

Does equality have to mean going against your natural tendencies? Is it necessary for men to be housewives and for women to be CEOs and weightlifters in order for them to be equal?

In primitive societies it's natural and necessary for men to be hunters and warriors and for women to tend the home and raise children. Its using the natural tendencies of each to best advantage. Biological necessity... you protect the women and children... if a lot of men die in a war or hunting a mastodon, a single male can impregnate many women... in one night if need be!! If many women die, a single woman can only bear one child a year on average (excluding accidents like twins etc). So its obvious... the men fight and protect the women and children.

This is programmed into our DNA - and it takes millions of years for changes at that level. So yes, men DO tend toward pissing contests and violence, and women do tend toward child rearing and homemaking. Can they do other things? Of course... and not every man is Sly Stallone and not every woman is Kate Gosselin. And in a modern society where we don't face the daily threat of being overtaken by a neighboring tribe by force, we can freely ignore these inherited biological traits if we want to. But I also see a lot of feminists making fun of men for doing what comes naturally, as if they expect them to suddenly shed millions of years of genetic programming overnight and turn into Mr. Mom.

I'm not anti-feminist at all! In fact I"m totally pro feminist, but I just think mainstream feminism has missed a few things.

Example... one day I saw something on TV - this woman was all riled up about the statistics of women getting raped in prison. Women. What about the men who get raped in prison? Is that somehow less important? So where's the 'equality'? She seemed only concerned about women and not men. Too often I see feminism being used as a front for anger or aggression on the part of women. Thy say "we want equality" but many of them seem to really want revenge. Not all mind you, just many.

My only problem with feminists is that I haven't figured out how to get them to stop being hairy, man-eating butches and cook and clean for me. I never should have moved out of my moms house...

But since I don't want a man to cook and clean for me, I have no problem with men being feminists. That just leaves more objectifying for me to do.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

I think you misunderstood what Unelias meant Deery...

When he said "The feminist won" I think he meant in the general sense - that they've won and he's treating women truly equally with men.

Ah, well then in that case I take it back.

Also, I disagree with some of the stereotypes you're perpetuating above - in particular that men can be anything they want in movies/TV shows and women are forced to be sexy. It seems to me when that stereotype first started it was because women were always portrayed as weak screamers to be rescued by (sexy) male heroes. Now we have probably as many sexy female heroes as sexy male heroes, or very close. As well as countless shows portraying husbands as dumbasses who couldn't even tie their shoes without their smarter wives telling them how.

While the female characters are written more strong these days (at least as a surface idea of strong), there's still this "token female" syndrome, and yes, the vast majority of them are still as sexy as the "screamers", but I see a lot of average looking, funny looking, fat, old men in movies and TV shows (with a level of charisma and personality that seems to be lacking in the female characters) being lovable despite their obvious inner AND outer flaws (where can we find women in the media that are fat and ugly but still adored?). There's also the fact that you can rarely find women with names talking to other women about things other than a male love interest (the "Bechdel" test). Even if the female characters are strong and smart, it's usually about a guy being the main character, 9 times out of 10.

Male fantasy tends to express itself through images of strength and violence... as heroes basically. So you have the "guy movies". But women also have their "chick flicks". I think fantasy movies for women are romances.

I hate chick flicks (as do most people), especially for its surprisingly misogynistic, corny writing, and chick flicks shouldn't be the only movies where women are represented at all (like "eh, lets just give the women a pink flowery gab fest, no one else will be interested in their stories but them, as a specific genre for an entire gender"). Not all women fantasize about romance.

Does equality have to mean going against your natural tendencies? Is it necessary for men to be housewives and for women to be CEOs and weightlifters in order for them to be equal?

I don't have the natural tendency to be a girly housewife, that's just simply not how I was born. The fight here is not to force everyone to switch genders, but to open society up to different ways of living, where everyone can choose who they want to be, instead of being told that all girls play with dolls and all guys play with trucks and action figures. That's just as bad, forcing people to fit into typical gender divisions when not everybody feels that way naturally.

In primitive societies it's natural and necessary for men to be hunters and warriors and for women to tend the home and raise children.

It's a damn good thing we don't live in a primitive society, then, because I don't want to be forced to sit around and raise children. The key word, here, is choice.

But I also see a lot of feminists making fun of men for doing what comes naturally, as if they expect them to suddenly shed millions of years of genetic programming overnight and turn into Mr. Mom.

Just like I'm not naturally inclined to be Kate Gosselin, I'm sure not all men are naturally inclined to be macho and find it so challenging to be Mr. Mom. In fact, Mr. Dads actually like to be around their kids. The way you talk about biology, as if it's inevitable, makes me feel like I'm an anomaly that doesn't (or shouldn't) exist. I simply don't feel that way when I analyze myself. I think people like to play up biology to try to connect it better with the way our society is run, when in fact society doesn't always run healthy or logically. Why spend so much time playing up the gender differences when maybe the truth is that we're not that different? Of course we have some obvious differences, and there are girly girls and macho guys who naturally exist, but why force it on everybody?

Example... one day I saw something on TV - this woman was all riled up about the statistics of women getting raped in prison. Women. What about the men who get raped in prison? Is that somehow less important? So where's the 'equality'? She seemed only concerned about women and not men. Too often I see feminism being used as a front for anger or aggression on the part of women. Thy say "we want equality" but many of them seem to really want revenge. Not all mind you, just many.

I agree, it would be nice to highlight problems with both genders, but feminism is also an opportunity to talk about problems specific to women, where elsewhere they might be ignored. When talking about women's issues once in a while, it shouldn't have to be required to talk about men at every single point. I agree, though, that there should be more focus on men's issues, but that's also inhibited by the traditional idea that men should "man up" and not talk about any problems. There's a bit of a conundrum between you saying that men are naturally macho and shouldn't be forced to be "Mr. Mom", but saying that we should be more sensitive about men's issues.

Deery, the problem I see with you using yourself as examples of how you dont fit the "natural" female role is that you are only one person, not a representable sample size. Darkmatters is not talking about biology to say you shouldnt exist. If you think about it we are all anomalies in one way or another. (hi, Im a guy who detests pissing contests!) He is saying that despite whatever choice feminism strives to give, there is still going to be a natural tendency for the majority of women to be the way biology wants...and that it is ok for them to be that way if they want.

A vibe I get from feminists (in general) is that women who chose to be girly, or housewives are holding back the cause or are "weak". Its one thing to champion women having the option of not taking over that role, its quite another to degrade them for their choice.

What this comes around to is that, you are free to be however you want to be. Its ok you are not "girly" or you dont want to take care of kids. But dont get upset if the majority of women are not...either by natural tendency or by choice. Thats all.

Actually I would love to have a wife who made enough money that I could just take care of kids and be home all day, I hate going to work.

Oh lord... what have I done?

I got myself into a political argument again, and now I find I don't really have the strong desire to make long detailed answers. But I'll try... maybe I can wade through all of this.

Ok, at least now your responses are a lot better than the first one above. TBH, that one sounded shallow and vindictive and like I said, riddled with stereotypes. But this one is much better.

I'll try to cover your points concerning movie/TV stereotypes with this -

Obviously in the Action Hero realm females now hold their own against males, and can be every bit as shallow and sexy as their male counterparts always have been. It's completely unfair of you to just dismiss chick flicks because you don't like them. It's also unfair to assume "most people don't" like them. If I recall, Gone With the Wind was THE most popular movie until fairly recently. Also, if nobody liked them, there wouldn't be such a massive industry cranking them out.

Male fantasy tends to be sexual/heroic, while female fantasy tends to be about relationships. Are we even seriously arguing this?

REALLY?

(Sorry... couldn't resist! )

I think if a man or woman write a story or a movie, they should be true to hat they believe in and not pander to politically correct images unless that is what they believe in. In other words, I think it's appropriate that in stories written by men male fantasy predominates. And in stories written by women their fantasies predominate. Romance novels are a field vastly dominated by women - at least I believe so... haven't checked stats, but I'd be willing to.

Biologically, men have a strong tendency toward proving their strength and competing, and women toward nurturing and homemaking. Psychologically of course that needn't be true, and as we obviously both agree, many people go against type. Hell, you're probably more manly than I am!! Fortunately, in today's world that's no longer considered as shocking or wrong as it once was. Look at the way movie stereotypes have changed just since the 80's!! And also the way kids are being taught... I think a lot of progress is being made.

I also think it's totally fair that movies reflect society, and society itself isn't yet fully adjusted to these new ideas about equality. I know feminism has been around for over a hundred years, but I mean new in biological terms. As I said, it takes millions of years for changes to take place in a species biologically. And I think you misunderstood why I said that... it wasn't an excuse for why we should stick to traditional gender roles at all... I was trying to say that we're working on it, but it's hard to go against biological imperative. We can't expect changes to happen overnight.

I also feel it's vitally important that we don't completely turn our backs on important archetypes. The warrior/hero and the nurturing earth mother goddess as well as the young beautiful woman (and man) are deeply embedded in our psyches and we shouldn't try to remove them. Myths are vitally important, and those are mythological figures that we need to communicate with, not resist.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

I don't have the natural tendency to be a girly housewife, that's just simply not how I was born.

You can't possibly know that at your age, unless you've got a child. These archetypal forms come upon us suddenly and irresistably, often against what we believe to be our nature, at appropriate times in our lives. Motherhood will change a woman drastically. Often a young woman who says things like what you did will have a child and discover that, not only does she love it with all her being, but she's actually quite an excellent natural mother. Having not been through that forging experience yet, you can't say how you'd react. Just as I'm not the most masculine guy, but if I find myself in a life-or-death situation I might surprise myself with how violent I can be.

Ok, I think I covered all the points I really wanted to, and I'm tired of writing now.

Okay. The reason feminists are generally man-haters can be deduced very simply.
We have basically no sexism in this society.
Women can have all the jobs that men can have.
Women don't get paid less than men.
The richest person in the world is a woman in fact.

Women are equal with men in this society.
Therefore there is obviously nothing left to complain about.
So the people who end up being feminists are the ones who hate men and want to be considered better than men, have more privileges than men.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

He makes a valid point, that especially in the media, they are still trying to perpetuate old-fashioned ideas that men's stories are far more interesting than women's, so that there are vastly more male characters than female (even though women make up roughly half of the population), and men can be anything they want regardless of appearance but women should only be sexy, most importantly, and love interests.

I'm sick of the assumptions that feminism (the idea that women are EQUAL to men, not better or worse) is about man-hating and being a hairy ugly lesbian (that's what conservatives have successfully indoctrinated people into thinking so that women are silenced from progressing any further).

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

While the female characters are written more strong these days (at least as a surface idea of strong), there's still this "token female" syndrome, and yes, the vast majority of them are still as sexy as the "screamers", but I see a lot of average looking, funny looking, fat, old men in movies and TV shows (with a level of charisma and personality that seems to be lacking in the female characters) being lovable despite their obvious inner AND outer flaws (where can we find women in the media that are fat and ugly but still adored?). There's also the fact that you can rarely find women with names talking to other women about things other than a male love interest (the "Bechdel" test). Even if the female characters are strong and smart, it's usually about a guy being the main character, 9 times out of 10.

See you're just ignoring the vast amount of women who are ugly and still loved by many.
This is what all these man hating feminists do. They ignore everything which goes against their idea of a sexist society. So they can keep complaining about how women are treated as objects.

Here is some examples of ugly females who are still liked, and I'm only going by women I've seen in Australian media, but there is obviously going to be a lot in America too.
Denise Scott


Judith Lucy


Bev Killick


Denise Drysdale


Rebel Wilson


Magda Zubanski (or something, not sure how it's spelt).

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

I don't have the natural tendency to be a girly housewife, that's just simply not how I was born. The fight here is not to force everyone to switch genders, but to open society up to different ways of living, where everyone can choose who they want to be, instead of being told that all girls play with dolls and all guys play with trucks and action figures. That's just as bad, forcing people to fit into typical gender divisions when not everybody feels that way naturally.

Since when is this done, in this day and age?
Yes some fathers don't want their boys to play with barbie dolls. Big deal. I don't think that should be forced on them, but I don't think it's a big deal.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Just like I'm not naturally inclined to be Kate Gosselin, I'm sure not all men are naturally inclined to be macho and find it so challenging to be Mr. Mom. In fact, Mr. Dads actually like to be around their kids. The way you talk about biology, as if it's inevitable, makes me feel like I'm an anomaly that doesn't (or shouldn't) exist.

LOLWUT!?
He explains the genetic and evolutionary role in how sexes are expected to be, and he's suddenly saying you are some freak of nature that shouldn't exist?
Jesus....

Yes you probably are an anomaly. That's not a bad thing.
Anything which is a deviation from the norm is an anomaly.
You have the chance and choice to not be a stay at home mum.

Anyway, the reason for more women staying at home, I think, is that they want to. Likely because of the evolutionary aspect.
A lot of women don't want to work for their entire lives. So many women, and not stupid bimbos, that I've met have said they just want to find a guy to work while they stay at home and
take care of kids or whatever. Many don't want this. And it is PERFECTLY ACCEPTABLE, for them to go get a job.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Why spend so much time playing up the gender differences when maybe the truth is that we're not that different?

No, we're not that different. There are a lot of differences. But we're both of the same species.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

Of course we have some obvious differences, and there are girly girls and macho guys who naturally exist, but why force it on everybody?

Nobody forces it on anybody. Or I should say society as a whole doesn't. There's obviously still some religious nuts and homophobes that hate if their child is homosexual, not fitting the norm etc.

LOL well ok, there you have Tommo's rather extreme view.

I don't agree with a lot of that though Tommo... equality is still a long way off in society, though we are making huge strides. And while I was thinking the exact same thing about un-attractive women in movies and TV, I suspect Deery's right that there are a lot less of them than men.

But I think that's largely because of the longstanding ideal of the attractive woman. I don't think it's an entirely bad thing. It's quite obvious that the majority of women themselves believe a woman should be attractive... I don't think that's entirely social conditioning. Biologically (there's that dirty word again, but we can't escape it) men fight for the most attractive women. This holds true in the animal kingdom as well... some species the males fight over females who show the most attractive displays and in some species it's reversed (birds for example). Most women I know wouldn't dream of going out without dressing nice and doing their hair to try to look really nice. You yourself get dolled up and take pictures. (Um - I mean Deery, not Tommo!) There's nothing wrong with that.

I don't think it's entirely passe for a woman to look as pretty as she can and her man to be her protection in case other men try to do something inappropriate. And I hope women don't stop trying to be attractive! So I think it's natural that that archetype shows up in our movies etc. Maybe it is a bit overdone though... and I would like to see MORE women who are valued for other attributes, but we've been seeing it on the better shows and movies. It's at least a step in the right direction for us as a society.

Originally Posted by DeeryTheDeer

I happen to be a girl who has actual self-respect and ambitions

I know plenty of women (me included) with self respect and ambitions, and they are not feminists. You judge others for making assumptions and stereotyping, yet you seem to do a lot of this yourself.

I've never been a fan of feminism...I cringe when friends make sweeping feminist statements on facebook or wherever. But just because I'm not a feminist doesn't mean I'm old-fashioned or believe in traditional gender roles either. You can't put a label on everyone.

I never understood feminism. It acts like the equality of women is not a well-established unconscious assumption for most people by now. It seems to perpetuate the world view it's so against.

Originally Posted by tommo

Women are equal with men in this society.
Therefore there is obviously nothing left to complain about.
So the people who end up being feminists are the ones who hate men and want to be considered better than men, have more privileges than men.

Or the ones who disagree with the fantastically ignorant assertion that women are now completely equal in society.

Here is some examples of ugly females who are still liked, and I'm only going by women I've seen in Australian media, but there is obviously going to be a lot in America too.
Denise Scott


Judith Lucy


Bev Killick


Denise Drysdale


Rebel Wilson


Magda Zubanski (or something, not sure how it's spelt).

Wow. Well, Australia may be vastly different in its media than the US (the US has been remaking Australian shows lately, just like UK shows, and I suspect that the society of the UK and Australia are similar). I saw a BBC show on once called "Rosemary & Thyme", about two older gardening women who solve crimes, and I thought to myself, "My God, they would NEVER do this in America. Two main women, talking to each other, who aren't young, skinny and covered in makeup because they're just there to sell the show with sex?" Those pictures shocked me, I really can't think of any American equivalents, except maybe Rosanne and Kathy Griffin.

In American media, I cannot think of a single female character whom I can relate to or who I would actually want to be. A lot of them are "tough chicks" (also token females) at first just to be politically correct (before they slip in their required anti-feminist message), and then eventually by the end of the movie fall in love with the main protagonist and are intent to be just behind him, all passive and quiet, staying at home or something while the guy has adventures that I would rather be doing. You have to search far and wide to find any media that defies these cliches (My Little Pony being a huge recent exception, created by self-proclaimed feminist Lauren Faust. There, did I ruin the show for you guys? PS, I'm very encouraged that that show is doing so well with male audiences, especially since Disney tried so hard to make "Tangled" more male-centric because they thought that no guys would want to see a princess movie, or a movie about a girl). I'm interested in animation, by the way, that's why I list all those examples.

I'm so sick of being called a man-hater for pointing out the obvious sexism surrounding me everywhere I look in the media, choking out any examples of women who are anything like me, as if I have to constantly prove that these examples exist (and trust me, they are EV-ER-Y-WHERE, probably ingrained into the psyche, especially apparent in rap videos and YouTube comments), making it even harder to progress.

Of course you didn't address any of the points Nina made in her post because I guess that would force you to critically examine your beliefs sooo.....

And yes I disagree with you so of course I hate all women.

Originally Posted by Wayfaerer

It seems to perpetuate the world view it's so against.

.


Yup its true Im an assssholeee

Originally Posted by stormcrow

Of course you didn't address any of the points Nina made in her post because I guess that would force you to critically examine your beliefs sooo.....

And yes I disagree with you so of course I hate all women.

Maybe I was busy replying to tommo, but yeah, I hate your guts too and will find any reason at all to hurry and jump on you, even in seconds time.

Maybe the problem here is the big F word- feminism. People say they're all for gender equality, but as soon as you drop the big f bomb, which basically is supposed to mean gender equality, people are so lividly against it. That's why I thought that most women, including nina, don't want to be associated with the dreaded label, because they don't want to stir anything up and be attacked for standing up for it. "Oh no, I'm not that, I'm not a person who wants equal rights for women. I just want to have a good time." The media has successfully taken misandrist females and associated them with feminism, when actual feminism has nothing to do with misandry. Now feminism is just a slur used to dismiss women's equality while acting outraged over "reverse-oppression".

But I do see that it can be associated with bitchy women and that's why nina doesn't want to be one of those bitches. I guess that makes me a big bad horrible worthless bitch too. I've never met any women in my life who identified as feminists and also hated men. It's like the most deeply ingrained stereotype about feminists ever.

I decided to stop feeling pressured to shut up about this and went all out into the open about it.

Feminism seems too one sided to be synonymous with gender equality. I'm all for gender equality and will stand up for any ones equal rights but I'll never attribute this to "feminism".

Perhaps then I should identify as "humanist". I'm already a secular humanist anyway.

However, under the banner of "feminism", women gained many rights in this past century, especially in the 60s, so you would be ignorant to not associate the rights women do have now (even the right to vote and work) with feminism.

My biggest pet peeve is probably watching arguments over labels, and I'll never contribute to one. I identify with what I think, period. In reality, people who thought women should have equal rights could have called themselves whatever they wanted and it wouldn't have mattered, the only thing that mattered was their thoughts and actions.