Hmmm... If feminism is for equality, how come it has the prefixe "fem" in it? In my opinion, equality is an egalitarian's job.
It has that prefix because women have been systematically discriminated against for much of American and world history. In promoting women's rights, true feminists promote equality.
There is inequality on both sides. It may be quite true that this is more so for women. It has been suggested to me that feminism offers a narrowed focus where egalitarianism is like a shot gun to the problem. It might also be true that the narrow focus is indeed needed. But I see problems here.
The first is while you can fix many problems for one side by focusing in on it you would still fail at true equality as you still have the problems the other side faces, regardless of how few they may be.
The second issue I see with this is that it creates an environment more conducive to people looking for special rights rather than equal rights. Which if I'm no too mistaken is the current PR problem feminism is facing right now. Where we have at least some rather vocal individuals speaking on behalf of feminists looking for special rights rather than for equality. It may be true that such individuals aren't actually feminists, but that wouldn't defeat the point that the narrower focus on JUST women's rights doesn't help to create the conditions for these people to become vocal.
This last one really is just semantics but the term feminism as meaning equality for the sexes automatically fails by a name suggestive of only having focus on one side. In which case this is a branding issue where feminists could have people who would otherwise be on their side who are rallying against it instead only because of the name.
It has that prefix because women have been systematically discriminated against for much of American and world history. In promoting women's rights, true feminists promote equality.
The prob is it only supports one side of the issue. Also, if a man says women cry when criticized he gets fired. If a woman made a hash tag that promotes misandry she gets supported by a group. In other words, true feminists don't promote equality.
That semantics issue with the prefix is probably due to the history of the movement, as GhostOfNinja already addressed, it does not exclude the movement from also addressing egalitarian issues nowadays. This is also a point that is often used as strawman to quickly dismiss anything that is proposed by feminists in some situations.
There are feminists who are, as MageGrayWolf said, rather focused on getting special rights for women and not caring for men, also in situations like roydotor2000 mentioned, but those women often (at least in the internet) get called 'feminazi' instead of feminists to mark the difference, even though they themselves probably see it differently. The question is maybe, to what point is this a No True Scotsman and to what point are they really diverging from actual feminism. Is there maybe a kind of official reference for the movement where it is defined for what they stand?
In other words, true feminists don't promote equality.
Dictionary disagrees there. "A social theory or political movement which argues that legal and social restrictions on women must be removed in order to bring about equality of both sexes in all aspects of public and private life." (Italics are mine) If it doesn't fit that definition, it's not a feminist.
western world feminists are taking it a few steps to far.. they do not want equality. they want to have power over man like man had power of woman since recorded history...
i stand behind the feminists in 2nd and 3rd world countries.
i stand against the feminists in 1st world countries. (except those that only glorify being a woman and help other woman finding back their pride as a woman. (we should have something like the later for man aswell.))
While the average feminist is a good person who will say they believe in equality, feminists who work in academia and politics are sexist and cruel and have done damaging things to society as well as spread myths. Sadly good feminists tend to ignore it and believe the propaganda.
Well if you ask any women and most men if they are a feminist, they'll say yes, if you ask them why they are a feminist they'll say "because I believe in equality", and that's literally all they know about it. Feminists who are in academia and politics however are corrupt and bad.
Well if you ask any women and most men if they are a feminist, they'll say yes, if you ask them why they are a feminist they'll say "because I believe in equality", and that's literally all they know about it.
Is there so much more to know about it, when equal rights is the principal goal of feminism?
Feminists who are in academia and politics however are corrupt and bad.
Why specifically them? And why this enormous over-generalisation?
Well if you ask any women and most men if they are a feminist, they'll say yes, if you ask them why they are a feminist they'll say "because I believe in equality", and that's literally all they know about it.
The only one that fits that description is Christina Hoff Sommers.
but those women often (at least in the internet) get called 'feminazi' instead of feminists to mark the difference
Besides the No True Scotsman, another issue is that although these people are, as we recognize, "feminazis", they still receive positive attention from feminists in general.
If it doesn't fit that definition, it's not a feminist
As HaHiHa mentioned, the Scotsman. A few years ago a group of people were blocking doors and attacking people trying to see a lecture by Warren Ferrel in Toronto. Police were eventually brought in to calm them down, which they responded by lambasting the officers and continuing to harass those tryig to go in. All because of a quote mine which made it seem like Ferrel advocated/was an apologist for date rape. These people referred to themselves as feminists.
(The lecture was going to cover topics of men's mental health, with some points on depression/suicide), as well as other topics.
The only one that fits that description is Christina Hoff Sommers
B A S E D M O M
Also I think you misquoted, as Christina is a long time feminist.
The prob is it only supports one side of the issue. Also, if a man says women cry when criticized he gets fired. If a woman made a hash tag that promotes misandry she gets supported by a group.
Well that's a very convenient assertion of yours, but that's about what it is. An assertion.
In other words, true feminists don't promote equality.
Dictionary disagrees there. "A social theory or political movement which argues that legal and social restrictions on women must be removed in order to bring about equality of both sexes in all aspects of public and private life." (Italics are mine) If it doesn't fit that definition, it's not a feminist.
(Bold by me)
I think that's what @roydotor2000 means, it's that feminism (according to your definition) seemingly only strives to remove restrictions on women, not on both genders.
What I'd like to bring out a bit more clearly is that equality goes both ways. If someone believes women (in their rights) should be equal to men, they must also believes that men (in their rights) should be equal to women.
If you believe a=b you must also believe that b=a. If you don't, you don't believe in equality, you believe in superiority.
but those women often (at least in the internet) get called 'feminazi' instead of feminists to mark the difference
Besides the No True Scotsman, another issue is that although these people are, as we recognize, "feminazis", they still receive positive attention from feminists in general.
I don't see how you find this to be a "No True Scotsman" issue, the definition is pretty clear. If someone advocates for (whether directly or indirectly) the superiority of women over men they are not a feminist. Quite simple.
What I'd like to bring out a bit more clearly is that equality goes both ways. If someone believes women (in their rights) should be equal to men, they must also believes that men (in their rights) should be equal to women.
If you believe a=b you must also believe that b=a. If you don't, you don't believe in equality, you believe in superiority.
That's pretty much my main issue with feminism as it is now.
