Whoa-----from "Seventeen" magazine "Are You A Feminist?

[ismnotwasm]

I think this is progress friends-- given the age demographic. Yeah, the article isn't the greatest, but I like the fact it exists at all.

Didn't someone mention that feminism is dead?

Oops. Their bad.

You so don’t have a prob taking charge. Want to start your own Etsy biz? Done. Wish school had a debate club? You create one with your girls. But you also get melty when your crush pays for your fro-yo at Red Mango or opens the car door for you. So does that mean you’re a feminist . . . or not?

Miley Cyrus and Beyoncé wear the f-word like a badass badge of honor. But super-confident Katy Perry says she’s not a feminist, and Kelly Clarkson doesn't want to be lableed one either. And it’s not just celebs who are divided. “I don’t associate with that word because it feels negative—like you’re angry and you don’t need men,” says Valerie, 15, founder of The Validation Project, a blog that aims to build the confidence of all teens. On the flip side, there are girls like LaTonya, 20, who made “being a feminist” her New Year’s resolution. “Feminism is about thinking you can do whatever you want—of course, I believe in that,” she says. Even President Obama took a stand by saying it’s about time women received the same pay as men for equal work—and his comments blew up all over Twitter, with hundreds of thousands of people supporting the sentiment.

So why are some girls afraid of calling themselves feminists? It comes down to retro stereotypes and murky old-school definitions. “Some people think being a feminist means you don’t shave your armpits and that you want to bring down guys,” says Julie, 21, creator of a new-wave feminist blog, thefbomb.org. “But that’s not it at all. It’s about girls knowing their potential and not letting anything hold them back.” And that means being confident, embracing your femininity however you choose to, and just being you. It’s not just some giant movement—it’s personal.

More:http://www.seventeen.com/entertainment/reviews/feminism-katy-perry-miley-cyrus?spr_id=47364656

[malthaussen]

1. Friend of mine... 45 year old guy... made an interesting point

He refuses to be labelled a feminist because 1) It isn't inclusive enough and 2) because there are too many people he does not want to be associated with who employ that label. I think there may be a lot of 2) going around.

Me, I refuse to be labelled a feminist because of 1). But I don't worry much about labels anyway.

-- Mal

[Gravitycollapse]

2. In what way is feminism not inclusive?

[malthaussen]

3. Depends on whom you ask.

As a word, "feminist" is not as inclusive as "humanist." Although the argument is made that "feminism" does include concern for all of humanity. Which rather evades the question of why it is not, then, called "humanism."

Functionally, if we do a Venn diagram of humanism, then all humanists are feminists, but the reverse does not have to be the case.

-- Mal

[ismnotwasm]

5. Feminism arose out of an unequal paradigm that still exists.

While feminism is for human rights and equality, it had been burned as a movement, former allies deserting it, tons of negative press and misunderstanding, it dwindled until the Information Age.

While humanism might be incorporated in my feminism, that's not the label I choose to support empowering women.

[Gravitycollapse]

7. That's basically a slight against feminism to say it doesn't need to exist because of humanism.

As if humanists are themselves capable of addressing every necessary subcategory of their philosophy.

Are latino/latina or indigenous or black African or African American or Asian or gay rights movements now not necessary because humanism exists?

The attempt to steal away the purpose of feminism and reassign it to humanism is, to me and many others, extremely offensive. And it disregards the needs and accomplishments of the movement that necessarily must exist as a targeted effort. Rather than one single megamovement which, because of it's size, is incapable of properly catering to every identity within its boundaries.

[malthaussen]

8. Which would tend to indicate that feminism is not inclusive.

By your own definition.

In any event, I make no argument that feminism is not necessary because humanism exists. You are applying your own interpretation and taking umbrage as a result.


-- Mal

[Gravitycollapse]

9. I don't understand your need to have every movement cater to everyone else. That's ridiculous.

By definition, feminism is a movement driven to meet the needs of women. Although I would argue it has expanded past that boundary to meet the needs of anyone not willingly complicit in the patriarchy.

That is a rather wide berth by almost any movement's standards. But I will not deny that it is specialized. Movements have to be specialized in order to meet the needs of specific groups.

Consider for a moment computer technology. There are specialists in hardware and specialists in software and specialists in programing and specialists in exotic materials and so on and so forth. Each group adds to the entirety of computer technology but caters to specific subjects that require specialization.

That is the issue here. Feminism is not "exclusive" in that it doesn't seek to push members out. It only asks that the members adhere to a certain set of principles.

Like I said before, I find it offensive that people wish to steal away the identity and accomplishments of feminism and hand them over to something like humanism. That's simply an erasure against feminist history. Feminism contributes to humanism.

[malthaussen]

10. But I have to reiterate, I make no such argument.

In point of fact, I agree with you about the specific nature of feminism. And have made no suggestion that the accomplishments of feminism be stolen away and placed elsewhere.

I have made the personal statement that I am a humanist. Because I am a humanist, my ethical stance incorporates the goals of feminism. It also incorporates the goals of many other "isms." Now, most feminists I know also embrace the goals of other isms. So feminism qua feminism is not necessarily exclusivist, in the sense that any given feminist need not be wedded only to the goals of feminism. Feminism is only "exclusive" then, in the sense you have described, and so far we agree.

Not only does "feminism contribute to humanism," but I would argue that feminism has succeeded in pushing the boundaries of complacent (and historically male-dominated) humanism, or at least in serving as a little bit of a poke in the ribs to encourage self-identified humanists to broaden their vision. Over the course of a few centuries, humanism has had continually to revise the definition of "human," as a glance at the US Constitution will demonstrate.

With no wish to offend, I very much fear you are addressing arguments you expect to hear when the point of humanism and feminism is raised, rather than any argument I have actually made. But hey, you don't know me.

-- Mal

[ismnotwasm]

4. Many Black Feminists use the word

"Womanism" because they felt under or non- represented by white feminists.


This is why I enjoy this article-- it tells young girls feminism is inclusive.

Feminism has made it's mistakes as any growing movement does and it's good to acknowledge them.

[truedelphi]

11. I was considered to not be a feminist back in

early 1970's, Madison WI, due to my interest in having successful pregnancy, carrying said baby to term, and then having the child.

Some people really define things very narrowly!

[calimary]

6. This is another example of how our words have been turned against us.

Not only has "liberal" been turned into a dirty word. "Feminist" has been turned into a dirty word as well. We have allowed the enemy to pervert the very meaning of it. Whether it was the load of visuals of george herbert walker bush at the CONvention, visibly curling his lip in disgust every time he almost literally spat out the word "liberal," or the derisive words that automatically are laminated onto the word "feminist" - like bra-burners, uppity women, man-haters, and worse. Guilt by association.

[GeoWilliam750]

12. So many positive concepts have been tarred by media

So many good things have come to be regarded as dirty words.

Feminism, liberal, Democrat, socialist, union, activist, organiser, national healthcare, civil rights, regulation, Planned Parenthood.

And we have let the right take control of the perception these concepts, much to the detriment of all of us. Personally, I prefer "Radical Feminist".

I have never understood how anyone argues against feminism. I have never heard anyone explain cogently or persuasively what is wrong with:

- Equal pay for equal work
- Equal opportunity for advancement
- Freedom from harassment
- Freedom from fear of sexual violence
- Complete - and highly informed - control over their own bodies
- Access to affordable reproductive healthcare (although I would argue for single payer for everyone in any case)
- An end to the objectification of women in media and advertising (playing on the fear of being undesirable, etc.) that degrades women.

Most of the arguments seem to be little more than "I want someone to be demonstrably weaker than me - preferably a woman". Bullies do not quit bullying simply because someone submits, and the strong seldom give up power without a struggle.

Thus, it is time to take back the word "feminist", and wear the term with pride.

[ismnotwasm]

13. +100,000,000