Let me rephrase it - feminism is, in its entirety, about women. What it solves for men it only does to make it work for women. It’s a movement about women’s rights, after all. It has never been about men, and blindly following feminism as men is like trying to make a pencil using a blueprint for a hammer.
From my experiences, I don’t face much questioning around men’s issues in the feminist communities, as long as it’s not something directly concerning women, and even then little consideration is given to considering why men act a certain way and what conditions should be changed to prevent it - it most commonly takes a directive approach instead.
Feminists were not the ones who made it impossible to live on one salary - capitalists simply used the fact both people in the family are now working to be able to pay less and extract more profits. But feminists speak little about the fact most of that financial burden still lies on men, or that there is a common expectation for a man to earn more than a woman. For them, it’s commonly a non-issue.
What is beyond me at the end of the day is why people took the movement that is about women, always claims to be about women and historically never been about anyone but women and suddenly pretended it’s about everyone, while it didn’t change the slightest in that regard. Women lead feminism, and men have little input in its development. Women see feminism as a movement about themselves. But when the time comes for someone to point this out, everyone suddenly pretends feminism is about everyone. This community is openly feminist, so, ultimately, it is not for or about men, it’s about what women want men to be.
I, too, have an egalitarian and antisexist background. I have to point that out clearly, because antisexism, while including feminism, is not limited by it, despite what many would make others believe. I am, however, socially pressured to be a provider, and instead do my best to be - exactly - a partner. An equal, not only in joys but in duties as well. And this is surprisingly hard to find someone to share this approach, at least in my area.
Let me rephrase it - feminism is, in its entirety, about women.
Rephrasing the same point does not make it more true. I already got it that it’s your view and I disagree - I don’t think we will find a common ground on this point, which might stem from different personal experience.
blindly following feminism
Blindly following anything is dumb, kind of general rule. And also feminism does not claim to be solution to all problem. Again it’s a sociological framework (that is evolving) to analyze power dynamics in society, from a rather specific point of view. It’s like expecting game theory to solve all your problems.
But feminists speak little about the fact most of that financial burden still lies on men, or that there is a common expectation for a man to earn more than a woman. For them, it’s commonly a non-issue.
It is a non-issue for feminist that men earn more than women? And that women are still financially reliant on man is not a concern for feminists? I think you just fail to see that a lot of points you are mentioning are directly connected to critique feminism is bringing up. And again - no one is stopping men from bringing up those issues - not like men would lack platforms.
What is beyond me at the end of the day is why people took the movement that is about women, always claims to be about women and historically never been about anyone but women and suddenly pretended it’s about everyone
And you will never get it, since you fundamentally misunderstand feminism.
ltimately, it is not for or about men, it’s about what women want men to be.
And yet, men gather here and talk about their issues - and you are the one having a problem with it. While no-one is stopping you from creating a non feminist male issue community and see where it goes. Or you can check one that was around here and see how it ended.
I am, however, socially pressured to be a provider, and instead do my best to be - exactly - a partner. An equal, not only in joys but in duties as well. And this is surprisingly hard.
Guess who is one of the few groups fighting against societal pressure thru narrow gender roles? But than again if you are searching for non feminist women who want to be equal partners and not a provider - I might have an idea why it’s hard.
I don’t think there’s much ground to disagree or misunderstand on my first statement - feminism, by its very name and definition, is a movement of women (fem-) against gendered oppression of women (misogyny, a form of sexism). The umbrella term is antisexism, which covers all kinds of sexism and includes feminism, masculism and, arguably, movements for the rights of nonbinary people. As per personal opinions, I strongly prefer a united antisexist front that could tackle the issues from both sides, and find the rest highly unproductive and divisive.
rather specific point of view
Exactly. And a very narrow one at that. Feminism is a movement driven by women, and, first and foremost, it takes into account the experiences of women. Trying to solve two-sided gendered issues only from the feminist angle is like taking masculist theory and trying to explain everything stemming from experiences of men.
Feminists do critique uneven pay, which I did mention. They do care about financial independence. However, they do not actively combat the issue beyond this point - it’s not a feminist problem when a man is still expected to provide a higher income, even when a woman is able to pay for herself. By essentially omitting this angle, feminists miss out on one of the key pieces behind why men are more likely to get a higher office. This very expectation of needing to spend more drives more men into high-earning careers, and, on the other end, in some cases they are more likely to be promoted exactly because they are commonly seen as main providers, and so it is recognized they need it more.
My problem is that feminism here is wrapped in a foil that disguises it for some sort of men’s movement, which might be enticing for some and gets some people engaged into genuinely believing feminism is the ultimate answer to sexism, for men and women. I have witnessed some of the more aggressive overtakings of the Internet spaces by some of the feminists, and believe this is one of the ultimate manifestations of a broken antisexist movement. The result? Men have little to no say in the wider antisexist movement that is now almost unilaterally feminist, and many of those silenced turn to patriarchy instead. Good job.
I’m searching for someone who, like me, still believes in that an antisexist movement should be united. I am feminist in the sense of “women should get all the practical and real rights men have, and should get a say in all spheres of life”, and I am masculist in the sense of “men should get all the practical and real rights women have, and should get a say in all spheres of life”. And I don’t believe either is worth a dime without the other.
I don’t think there’s much ground to disagree or misunderstand on my first statement - feminism, by its very name and definition, is a movement of women (fem-) against gendered oppression of women (misogyny, a form of sexism).
Feminism is also a sociological theory to analyses aspects of society. If you feel excluded from feminist movement - due to your experiences, sure. But I don’t feel excluded at all and I don’t understand what is the point of trying to convince me and others that they are.
I strongly prefer a united antisexist front that could tackle the issues from both sides, and find the rest highly unproductive and divisive.
So why are you so divisive yourself?
Exactly. And a very narrow one at that. Feminism is a movement driven by women, and, first and foremost, it takes into account the experiences of women. Trying to solve two-sided gendered issues only from the feminist angle is like taking masculist theory and trying to explain everything stemming from experiences of men.
Except Feminism does not try to explain everything. It’s a lens to view specific aspects of society. Not the only one around. You can use some class theory, or something eternally different or - use different lenses to understand different aspects of society. Nobody is forcing you to just use feminism. Just this place happens to be one that uses that specific lens.
Feminists do critique uneven pay, which I did mention. They do care about financial independence. However, they do not actively combat the issue beyond this point - it’s not a feminist problem when a man is still expected to provide a higher income, even when a woman is able to pay for herself. By essentially omitting this angle, feminists miss out on one of the key pieces behind why men are more likely to get a higher office. This very expectation of needing to spend more drives more men into high-earning careers, and, on the other end, in some cases they are more likely to be promoted exactly because they are commonly seen as main providers, and so it is recognized they need it more.
Nope.
My problem is that feminism here is wrapped in a foil that disguises it for some sort of men’s movement, which might be enticing for some and gets some people engaged into genuinely believing feminism is the ultimate answer to sexism, for men and women. I have witnessed some of the more aggressive overtakings of the Internet spaces by some of the feminists, and believe this is one of the ultimate manifestations of a broken antisexist movement. The result? Men have little to no say in the wider antisexist movement that is now almost unilaterally feminist, and many of those silenced turn to patriarchy instead. Good job.
Nope. It’s a lens used here to view mens issues. You just again make things up and expect people to argue with you.
I’m searching for someone who, like me, still believes in that an antisexist movement should be united. I am feminist in the sense of “women should get all the practical and real rights men have, and should get a say in all spheres of life”, and I am masculist in the sense of “men should get all the practical and real rights women have, and should get a say in all spheres of life”. And I don’t believe either is worth a dime without the other.
Go, make your own community than, since you seem to somehow believe that folks here think that men should not have equal rights as women. It’s funny that you are complaining about feminist talking over communities and than it’s just what you want to do here.
