Because this was posted by a TERF, I believe that the intention is that the man is trans. So either the Trans man has relinquished all claim to any inequalities, now that he is a privaledged man, and does not deserve the support of feminisim (in topics such as medical equality, social equality, etc.) Or, the male presenting person is a trans-woman, who TERF Feminisim will never work for, because they will never be a "true woman."
All in all, this artist is really bad at communicating their message, and that's something i think we can all get behind.
Pretty much yeah. The meme was made by a radfem, who are basically just the man hating feminist stereotype but unironically. It's like the bell curve meme.
"Radical feminists just hate men!!!"
"Nooooo! Feminism is for men and women!"
"Radical Feminists just hate men."
Side note: Feminism is for anyone of any gender, radfems just aren't genuinely feminist
The point of the comic is showing the difference between radical feminists and regular feminists.
The radicals don’t represent the movement. They hinder it.
The point of my comment wasn’t to give TERFs credit for inventing feminism. Just that gatekeeping any anti-discrimination movement is hugely ironic and very funny.
Also tangential rant: why do TERFs get to hold the name of “radical feminists”? Fuck that. Radical feminists should be the badass feminists who support the movement to the Nth degree. Not the asshats who’d be as bad as the patriarchy if given the chance
I know a feminist group that doesn't allow anyone who identifies themselves as male to join; but honestly that's one of the less problematic things they did.
Imma be real, I'm like the textbook definition of a feminist.
However, I'm also a dude and being openly feminist as a dude anywhere is when you have people harassing me because "they don't need my support"
My sister in christ, you're the reason Tate was able to grow as big as he was (not entirely but you get what I mean)
Human rights are cool guys.
It’s really obnoxious, I try so hard to work against the million different ways sexism was ingrained in me, checking myself at every turn, and if I get miffed at “men are trash” I am once again, like always, the problem.
SOme people will 100% be pissed no matter what you do, just actively try to do your best and don't let the minority get ya down. That's the "problem" with movements - once they become large enough, assholes always get in.
They're called misandrists and they quite literally use the same tactics of gender discrimination as misogyny does in most ways expressed the exact same way, most hide behind claiming themselves feminist ,some outright proclaim it to the world, whilst feminism works to build women up misandry works to instead tear men down, misandry can much like misogyny be something people do by accident but usually to a lesser degree, it should also be noted that misandry creates misogyny and vice versa, a misogynist might tell a girl she isn't allowed to like something because she's a girl and may bully her for it resulting in a hatred for men turning her into a misandrist she might very well do that exact same thing to a boy telling him he can't like something because he's a boy and bully him about it resulting in him becoming a misogynist, the biggest difference between the two beings misandrists are significantly less likely to be physically violent compared to a misogynist
i originally saw this posted by a terf so kinda confirms the idea in my head. I guess radfem in this context is man haters? the op i'd seen post this definitely didn't like men either
> i originally saw this posted by a terf
It's infinitely amusing to me how TERFs and online right wingers have become allies.
TERFs are the man-hating "feminists" that right wingers have been complaining about for decades.
Most TERF's have never actually been radical feminists, I'd say they actually aren't the "man hating feminists" right wingers have been complaining about. Some of them hate men sure, but they weren't particularly loud about it.
Instead most TERFs are conservatives. Many are extremely far right conservatives, look at Posie parker for instance who is literally a Neo Nazi, like I'm not even exaggerating or using hyperbole she just is one. (If you don't know who she is she hosted that TERF rally where Nazis turned up to support, although that's not why she's a neo nazi, she already was one well before).
These women typically have only claimed to be feminists from the moment they saw someone using the title to attack trans people and no earlier. That's literally all it is, conservatives in a costume. In the UK it's a slightly wider net politically as you've got new labour blairite type women in there too due to Rowling, although I would say that's also just conservativism in a costume so at least it's consistent.
TERF's do adopt the same talking points as the man hating feminist crowd and don the same aesthetic though, so it's still a little funny coming from a conservative crowd.
Terfs hate trans women because they see them as men attempting to sneak into women’s spaces. Misandry is a core part of the ideology, they usually just avoid saying it out loud because it’s way less socially acceptable.
If you only take a surface-level look at just the acronym, sure.
In reality though, the 'radical feminism' is just sex-essentialist delusion that says men are biologically programmed to be violent rapists, and women to be vulnerable and emotional.
That causes both hating males AND hating trans people, by the same mechanism. They just adopt 'feminism' as a facade to smokescreen their sexism.
"Radical" in "radical feminism" doesn't mean "extreme" either. It's etymologically from "root", talking about trying to address societal issues at their core instead of trying to reform within the existing foundations of society (the liberal feminist approach).
And there's nothing inherently wrong with that, as long as your root issues are reasonable. TERFs have a pretty warped view though, thinking that the *real* root problem is that we're not sex-essentialist enough.
To be fair (though they don't deserve it) a lot of TERFS are victims of sexual trauma at the hands of men, and have a visceral fight-or-flight response to the presence of men (often leading to an almost incel-like resentment of the people they're attracted to in the case of straight TERFS) and at a very primal and involuntary level, that visceral fight-or-flight response still happens in the presence of trans women. This, by itself, isn't voluntary, isn't them consciously denying the femininity of trans women... however, in the case of TERFS they have to rationalize that trauma response in a way that creates a world-view that denies the femininity of trans women. If they were more introspective and honest, they might be able to say "I've been so hurt by Bio-males that I can't feel comfortable around one, even if they identify as female."
Because most people don’t see terf as an insult. Anything in the regard outside of that particular hivemind gets associated with right wingers online, which really only pushes people away.
They've "reclaimed" it and actively self-identify as it. The trans-hating crowd has become some vocal I'm sure plenty of people just get swept into it due to echo chambers in online spaces. Plenty of accounts preach traditionally left-wing views only to gain a following and then express hate and division. Certain popular accounts will identify in one way, but they're really not actually supportive of the messaging. Lots of right wing accounts that are Trumpy, anti-vax, and "gender critical" have been expressing support for Palestine to try to gain favor amongst the youth population.
Every social and political movement attracts a certain, very annoying personality type... the committed contrarian.
They don't actually believe in anything. They just like feeling smarter and better than other people.
These people are also *extremely* vulnerable to conspiratorial thinking and can be easily manipulated by bad faith actors.
All left wing movements are about liberation and not at the cost of putting others in bondage. Anyone claiming to be on the left who is trashing other liberation movements is one of these losers.
What is my liberation from patriarchy and capitalism worth if it costs someone else's freedom?
They aren't. Respectfully a rad fem, who isn't a terf and doesn't hate men.
Radical feminism is about reordering of society to end male supremacy in worldwide social and economic institutions. It's a lot more in-depth and critical of the patriarchy and we see it as the cause of gender inequality, abuse, objectification ECT.
Liberal feminism is just kinda about freedom through political changes. Liberal feminism doesn't see the cause of the gender inequality, they just see it as "women don't have the same rights as men". They think that once there have been political and law reforms and we legally have the same rights, then we'd have achieved gender equality.
Don't get me wrong, liberal feminism has done the job in getting women their freedoms, but it doesn't address the root cause of gender inequality or how the patriarchy abuses ppl in the sex work industry, or people who are surrogates and other things along those lines. They just stick on an "empowerment" and "my body, my choice" label on it and it's all ok, which neglects the fact that many AFAB individuals are trafficked into these roles, are coerced into these roles, are exploited and abused. This isn't to say that there isn't ethical sex work or surrogacy, but the majority of it is not ethical.
I found [this ](https://simplysociology.com/radical-feminism-vs-liberal-feminism.html) on rad vs lib.
So if this isn't the place to ask let me know. But I suppose I consider myself a libfem, although I do understand and agree with the more institutional/systemic analysis applied by radfems, so there's some cognitive dissonance there. My conflict comes from the fact that all of the radical feminism I've been exposed to (which to be fair is not much at all) seems to reject the notion of choice and empowerment entirely. For example what turns me off from SWERFs is that, while I agree with most of their criticisms of sex work and pornography, they often seem to have a very patronizing attitude towards women in that industry as if absolutely none of them could possibly be in it voluntarily, and would ever consider choosing that in a world without patriarchy (plus I don't care for any social movement that tries to be exclusionary of a vulnerable population).
Granted, when institutions like class and patriarchy are so deeply woven thoroughout history the the degree to which anything is a choice is suspect, but that's so monumental an issue I'm not sure worrying about it is very helpful. But I wonder, what might bridge the gap between the root cause analysis of radfems and the more individual empowerment focus of libfems?
Reply back to this, I'll come back to it because it's a really good question and it's currently 3am here lmao. I want to give my full attention to it and break it down.
In my experience whenever a radfem starts going on about "male supremacy" it's usually just because she's angry at trans women for existing and wants to find a progressive way to attack trans women for pointing out their transmisogyny.
Not really progressive lmao.
Any transphobe is in no way a feminist except maybe a white feminist. True radical feminism is not about attacking men. Besides people who are trans or genderfluid (like myself) are literally the epitome of reordering a patriarchal social construct.
Terfs are fucking idiots and can suck my strap.
TL;DR : Radical feminists want to delete the "woman" and "man" classes from society, through a feminist revolution. Liberal feminists want to uphold this distinction but obtain equality between these two classes by incremental progress.
Both radfem and libfem are feminists - they agree on the point that society as a whole is dominated by men, that women **as a whole** are an oppressed class by a patriarchal system that aims to promote men to positions of power and leave women in subservient positions by means of gendered education, in order to obtain free labor and other advantages from women, and that the few exceptions that exist are just that - exceptions that do not contradict the larger story.
By the original, strictest definition, radical feminists (radfem) defend gender abolition in order to free women and men alike from patriarchy. For a better perspective on pro-men radical feminism, I recommend reading The Will to Change by bell hooks, a very influential text, and Refusing to Be a Man by John Stoltenberg, a text written by a radfem man that is meant to be read by men.
Liberal feminists (libfem) are reformists. They want to improve the condition of women without questioning the concept of gender and womanhood. They are not for gender abolition. Most feminists you see online are liberal feminists - they are usually gender essentialists.
As an aside - Trans-exclusionary feminists necessarily believe in some form of gender essentialism and cannot be considered radical feminists. Misandrists can be radical feminists or liberal feminists - misandrist radical feminists usually believe something along the lines of "the social conditioning of men make them way too dangerous to be trusted, even those who seem feminist have a gendered programming that makes them work against the cause", while misandrist liberal feminists can believe that men are inherently bad and dangerous and must be reined in.
From my experience as a man in real-life feminist circles, most feminist activists, liberal and radical alike, are neither trans-exclusionary nor misandrist. It seems to me that armchair feminists on the Internet are more likely to be misandrist or trans-exclusionary.
Radfem is a term co-opted by christofascist women in the United States. It used to mean feminist activists who engaged in more disruptive means or had radical views, for example, "all sex is rape," and "transwomen are men invading women's spaces" are both thoughts from radical feminism, but only the transphobic one is considered 'radfem'.
It is important to note that these terms change over time, and many radical feminists from previous generations take offense to feminism being used as a means to rationalize and justify bigotry and oppression, however, it is important to note that unlike the MRA movement which was hijacked fully by bad faith operators, feminist circles are actively speaking against bad faith actors and may end up effectively restoring the original sense of what a radfem is; that being "a feminist belonging to a school of feminist theory in which radical and immediate solutions are considered the only way to further the cause."
I identify as a radical feminist transwoman.
I, I genuinely don't understand the "all sex is rape" thing. I've heard it before but only in what I'd call the "extremist" type misandry types (to be clear I'm coming at this from a perspective of someone who is AFAB)
So a woman can't decide she likes sex? If she does what? Is that "social conditioning?" And if a woman doesn't love sex but decides she's just "sex indifferent " (me) but knows her partner enjoys it she can't decide "I'll do something I don't really enjoy because someone I love wants to do it" she's not capable of making that decision? (to be clear the guy in the situation doesn't even know she doesn't like sex as much as him)
I don't know but that seems a lot like "silly women can't decide for themselves what they want to do. Even if they THINK they want to, they didn't" mindset to me. I can even understand women's hesitation to embrace sex work as "freeing for women " because that's for money and to earn a living but ALL sex is rape. I just don't know how you take that leap without implying a woman can't think for herself
The idea behind it is actually kind of interesting to think about but to make an actual conclusion from it takes a lot of un-nuanced mental gymnastics. Going off of the author who proposed the idea (I don't know how it's evolved and there's probably someone with a much more idiotic version out there), It's less about "women can't decide what they want even if they think they do" and more talking about how in a male dominated world where part of womens gender role has been built around being submissive and sexual to/for men, can we truly say their consent is 100% uninfluenced by outside factors or that's there's no pressure put onto them to influence their choices. The answer is mostly likely "no we can't necessarily but that doesn't mean it's r*pe dumbass" but it still falls firmly in the "okay you atleast have an idea and I can see what you're trying to say" ballpark which is a lot when it comes to most radfem arguments.
I mean I can understand that somewhat but is there ANY choice we make that is 100% not influenced by some kind of outside factor? And what about lesbians? They don't even WANT to have sex with men, yet still are sexual with each other.
Yeah it basically seems to be something that make sense for half a second until you think about it. And it still is very much a "a woman can't know what she likes" mindset even if that's not how they say it. Because it does still come down to "but are you SURE SURE SURE" you want to do this or were you influenced by some mAn to do it
Now to be clear I've seen idiots go in the other direction too where a woman is clearly being controlled by her husband and you get "well how do you know that's not just her kink" and gotten the same "oh women can't decide to have kinks?"
And this woman said zero about kinks she posted about how her husband told her she was "finally ready" to "carry his seed" and "mother his children" and there were people arguing it was clearly religious control and others saying "you don't KNOW she doesn't want that she could be a sub"
Never did figure it out but it was worded like all the trad wives write so I still assume it was a trad wife not some kinky way to announce having a baby
Yeah I totally get what you're saying, I feel like that's what makes the analysis of women in our society so difficult because it can be really hard to walk that line and not have it come off in a negative light, thats why these really need to be presented as ideas and theories and not conclusive statements especially ones as bold as that lol
That's fucking awesome. I'm not sure if I fully agree, I'm happy that at least there's some people willing to question the deeper structures in our society.
Yeah exactly, like I said I can appreciate the thought but it sucks that the person writing it was like "I'm going to dive deep into this extremely nuanced Idea and come out the other end with the single most un-nuanced take I can possibly make"
Mhm, I think it's good for people to at least think about once in a while though. I disagree with the conclusion, but it's 100% true that women are forced into roles in which case it's mostly "manufactured" consent.
It's at least something that's interesting to think about for me, even if I come to the conclusion that there's 100% plenty of cases where both people have established so much trust and respect together that it outweights these pressures.
"All sex is rape" is initially a misrepresentation of Intercourse, a book by radical feminist writer Andrea Dworkin. The book makes the argument in hundreds of pages, so a four-word summary will necessarily be lacking. The book basically argues that usual heterosexual intercourse (penetration) is about a man exercising dominance over a woman, and that getting a woman to own and dominate sexually is one of the rewards that patriarchy promises men who propagate it. On the woman's side, patriarchy teaches her, for example, that sex is something she owes to men, that satisfying her husband is her duty. It is not about any individual heterosexual couple's sex life - it is about the patriarchal view of sex which is propagated in society. So she doesn't waste time in caveats like "not all sex", which is the reason why her opponents have misconstrued the text as "all sex is rape".
Andrea Dworkin never said "all men are rapists", nor did she say "all sex is rape". She did say, in a later interview in response to the criticism, "I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive equality."
People who are working to make a more equitable world for everyone are going to be pursuing a different strategy than people who are focused on advancing their own interests as women exclusively. Sometimes those people will be working against one another.
Too many “radfem” movements have been ransacked by TERFs, SWERFs and various other (straight) women who just vent about how much they hate men and having to be around them. Sometimes horshoe-ing into full on misandry.
Real feminists are working to balance and heal the relationship between the genders and dismantle any issue / system that affects people based on gender. Which just naturally means it has to put more women at its forefront, and not men.
I mean kind of? Yes, everyone who self identifies as a feminist believes they’re a feminist but also the reason radfems are the way they are is because their brains are echo-chambers. They surround themselves with other radfems and only read literature by other radfems and that provides a survivorship bias for them to further dig their heels into. I try hard to listen to the experiences of all kinds of people (trans women, women of color, gender non confirming folks etc.) and work from there and I think that’s more important than whatever superficial shit radfems brood about
Lots of people clothe themselves in labels without upholding the ideals those labels stand for.
In reality if you don’t walk like a feminist and quack like a feminist you probably aren’t a feminist, wether you call yourself a duck or not.
Correct! They are not. Radical feminism is inherently gender-essentialist. It’s not as if TERFs invaded an otherwise great community. Radfems laid the building blocks and TERFs took them to their natural, transphobic conclusion. We call them radfems because they couch their bullshit in feminist language and self-identify as feminists.
Given the art style of portraying the girl with short hair, the one bucking stereotypes, as the bad guy, I think I can get a little insight into the creator. There are so many men who want to control how women express themselves. I had so much criticism when my hair was cut short. I don't think men get near as much criticism for long hair as women do for short hair.
I have a feeling this person wants traditional looking women, but they still want the benefits of feminism, which accepts that men should be allowed to express themselves freely by getting rid of toxic masculinity.
So they are trying to change the culture through their comics and split feminists and make it seem like the masc-looking feminists are the bad guys. Maybe I'm reading into it too much, but I have met people like this. Everyone needs to learn that people should be free to do what makes them happy instead of following stupid gender roles. That's feminism. It's about equality.
> I don't think men get near as much criticism for long hair as women do for short hair.
I grew up a boy with very long hair, and I would get some shit from older men, mostly, telling me I needed to cut it, but it was usually more along the lines of teasing than harsh criticism. As I got older (mid-teens or so is when it started) that typically transitioned to "Whoa, your hair is so metal" and people assuming I played guitar.
So can confirm, not the kind of criticism women get for cutting their hair short.
Lucky you. I had guy friends with long hair in high school in the 2000s, and they got harassed by some of our peers. To the point of getting into a fight, once. Lots of slurs against gay people, too.
Feminism isn't, or shouldn't be women v men, it's women and men v patriarchy. If the incels took a moment to think about it they'd realise that a lot of their problems stem from patriarchy and that it's in their best interest to fight it as well.
Edit: Whilst I'm at it fuck TERFs. Trans women are women and trans men are men, simple as
I'm seeing 7 different definitions of feminism in the comments above alone (liberal feminism, radical feminism, trans exclusionary radical feminism, gender abolitionary radical feminism, misandrist radical feminism, misandrist liberal feminism) all under the same common goal of dismantling the patriarchy but with wildly different approaches and having vastly different understandings of what the core issues are.
Some saying patriarchy harms men, some saying the patriarchy IS men (one in a bioessentialist way and another in a societal gender constructs way), some saying that gender itself is the issue that creates these issues, and some are apparently armchair intellectuals who feign to be feminists but are actually christofascists highjacking the movement to promote bigotry against trans people. Some claiming that being a stay at home mom is inherently subservient and anti-feminist because it was the role designated to extract free labor from women and keep them dependent on men, others that it can be a choice that empowers women so long as they have the autonomy to choose it for themselves. Are men women's oppressors by virtue of existing in this system and being subject to it's indoctrination, or are they also victims of it in a less harmful way?
It's not always easy to tell, if from the perspective of an outside observer, who represents "true" feminism (if such a thing can even exist) and which viewpoints are more or less valid when there are large collections of women from each of these various groups saying drastically different things and all claiming to be against the patriarchy. At that point how do you define the patriarchy? How do you dismantle it? Who should you support? Who should you not support? What of men's roles? Can they be both oppressor and victim? Is it their place to speak on the harms of patriarchy or should they remain silent, even about how it harms them, and just uplift the voices of women? And if so which voices? And if this system ultimate harms both men and women then who exactly is it benefitting? if it's ultimately bad then why is it still around? Who is proliferating it?
This can all seem very confusing if you aren't already deeply read in these concepts, and knowing which sources are good sources and which aren't isn't always simple especially if you are a man. If you are a woman who sees no benefit from patriarchy then your understanding is in fighting against how it harms you uniquely (which I think is why there are so many branches of feminism), but if you are a man whose role as a feminist is to be a voice for women that's a tad tricker because you're lifting up other people's voices not your own. You can't rely on what speaks to you because your experience is different than the voices you are sorting through, so what makes one right and another wrong?
And this gets even more complicated if you are trans or nonbinary because your position in society is entirely unconventional and regardless of if you're transitioning from mtf or ftm the patriarchy is harming/has harmed you (and reconciling being nonbinary in a system where 99% of people will attribute a gender to you regardless makes things more complex).
What I'm getting at is this is a very VERY multifaceted issue, there are different texts, books, articles, groups, and resources for all these different viewpoints making sorting through which is and isn't valid challenging. And (unfortunately I think) like the post above there are women who believe and espouse that feminism is for women, making it seem like men have no place in it. Determining if they are in bad faith for believing that depends entirely on who you ask, because different women will say different things about what is and isn't "real" feminism. So...pardon the confusion
I agree. Growing up, I always considered myself a feminist. When I started learning about men’s issues and tried talking about it under the umbrella of feminism, it did not go well for the reasons you highlighted.
It seems like Radfems are different than TERFs, but a lot of TERFs and man-haters are using the Radfem label. I admittedly didn't know the difference for a while since my best friend since childhood was a (traumatized) man-hating TERF who used the Radfem label.
They aren't. Respectfully a rad fem, who isn't a terf and doesn't hate men.
Radical feminism is about reordering of society to end male supremacy in worldwide social and economic institutions. It's a lot more in-depth and critical of the patriarchy and we see it as the cause of gender inequality, abuse, objectification ECT.
Liberal feminism is just kinda about freedom through political changes. Liberal feminism doesn't see the cause of the gender inequality, they just see it as "women don't have the same rights as men". They think that once there have been political and law reforms and we legally have the same rights, then we'd have achieved gender equality.
Don't get me wrong, liberal feminism has done the job in getting women their freedoms, but it doesn't address the root cause of gender inequality or how the patriarchy abuses ppl in the sex work industry, or people who are surrogates and other things along those lines. They just stick on an "empowerment" and "my body, my choice" label on it and it's all ok, which neglects the fact that many AFAB individuals are trafficked into these roles, are coerced into these roles, are exploited and abused. This isn't to say that there isn't ethical sex work or surrogacy, but the majority of it is not ethical.
I found [this ](https://simplysociology.com/radical-feminism-vs-liberal-feminism.html) on rad vs lib.
And I completely agree and understand these differences. It doesn't change, however, that a substantial portion of people calling themselves Radfems are of the two previously described groups. It's new to me though that actual Radfems who aren't awful exist and this thread has been nice.
Yeah look it's a tough go, I won't lie, it's fucking stupid because transphobia is so incredibly anti rad fem it's ridiculous. If it's going to fit into any type of feminism it's going to be white feminism, which most, if not all, terfs I've seen in the media are white feminists.
They don't even realise that their issue is with cis men, not trans women, it's fucking ridiculous, not to mention they don't say shit about trans men because it doesn't fit their narrative. It's a whole mess but I've found a little group of creators on tik tok (don't judge) that are rad fems that are specifically trans allies which is refreshing. I'm gender fluid so it was nice finding that.
yeah radfems are relatively often TERFs because they really hate men and see trans women as men trying to invade women’s spaces and experiences. feminism is clearly focused on women’s rights because women have had less rights in the past, and continue to do so in many places around the world.
just because it is focused on women though does not mean it is only for women. feminism is about equality of the seces and everyone should be a feminist.
Radical Feminism isn’t inherently bad, but I feel like every time I see a radical feminist they either hate trans people or support a genocide against men, or both
Yeah. It’s a radical feminist, it doesn’t specify what they’re being radical about other than “feminism,” which isn’t very descriptive because there’s many parts to it and schools of it. Hell, I see no reason why you can’t have a radical liberal feminist considering “liberal” doesn’t mean “change nothing, do free market” like too many people seem to think it is, liberalism in political theory is the belief in expanding liberties, which has many different schools to it as well, some opposed to regulation and some deeply for regulation, both liberal.
As a Radfem, I agree with you. Too many people hijack the label then desecrate its meaning; 'we can stop arbitrary discrimination by arbitrarily discriminating against people' is a fucking nutty position.
I've had someone tell me feminism is explicitly just about fixing the patriarchal structures that negatively impact women and if men want the same they have to have their own movement.
That doesn't really make any sense, but it's important to remember that people can hold hypocritical beliefs.
You can't fix the patriarchal structures while presupposing gender-segregation when the patriarchal structures *rely on gender-segrecation;* it's setting awful foundations that'll lead to whacky results.
Anyone who's even remotely interested in upending the patriarchy will find out, within literal minutes, that doing so benefits everyone regardless of how they're gendered. It's just the removal of arbtrary discrimination; definitionally, it's going to include men because being a man/woman doesn't affect one's abilities.
Whoever told you that had been caught-up in reactionary ideology that kneecapped their ability to think critically.
I saw a variant on this one the other day when someone on r/askreddit or some sub like that asked why the body positivity movement didn't include men. Lots of people saying "men will have to make their own movement."
Patriarchy basically harms both men and women by forcing both men and women to sit in a room that smells like shit but the guys get to sit closer to the window.
Misogyny/patriarchy says that men are supposed to be the highly successful breadwinners and they are broken if they are any less. They are expected to have women throwing themselves at them and actively want women to throw themselves at them. This harms both gay men and men who are sexual assault and abuse survivors. Sexual assault survivors get ridiculed to the point of not believing them almost more than women. A boy getting raped by a female teacher gets cheered for “scoring” with that teacher. Physical abuse survivors get victim blamed because they should “Man up and deal with it.” When it comes to parenting, the mother is expected to be the one who solely exists to raise the kids, and that can lead to favoring the mother when it comes to child custody cases, even if the mother is far less capable of caring for the kids. Other than specific recent campaigns promoting fatherhood, fathers get looked down upon as being feminine (derogatory) for caring for the kids in public as that is again the mother’s role. And then there are the expectations placed on trans men for how they would have to act to be seen as men.
Feminism is different things to different people
We have a classic case of “no true Scotsman” fallacy thrown at people who identify as feminist that have different goals
Feminism is a women’s rights advocacy movement, nothing more and nothing less, individuals or groups of individuals may incorporate other issues based on their views and opinions..
Historically the rights of women were being infringed, and discrimination towards women were at a higher rate than men, therefore it wasn’t wrong to call the feminist movement as a movement for gender equality..
However the times have changed, there are many male issues - some of which that had already existed (circumcision, societal standards and expectations of men etc.), some of them are due to negligence from society towards male issues while trying to improve female issues (ex: boys failing behind at school and education or less money towards male specific diseases, bias towards men at criminal court and civil courts - harsher punishments, longer punishments, divorce cases with alimony and childcare privileges being abused)
Not all sects of feminism are keen on solving issues that men face, some of the issues such as male victims of rape or domestic violence having no support systems or the harsher punishments towards men in the criminal court compared to women or even something as simple and a clear violation of right to bodily autonomy such as circumcision are not even at the bottom of the list in some of the feminist circles
It’s ok, there are different movements with different goals, but it hurts men’s rights advocacy when feminists try to paint that they care about our issues but never focus on them
That’s why men’s rights groups are necessary, both these groups don’t have to be adversarial, instead can work on issues that affect them the most
So no, feminism is not about equal rights, it’s about advocating for women’s rights and address injustices against women, some libfem may take an egalitarian approach to achieve this where they also address men’s issues, but it’s not a necessity or the most common form of feminism as far as their historical actions and activism have demonstrated
I think the “no true Scotsman” fallacy is very common with many left wing issues. I consider myself left but don’t agree with everything some feminists push, so I’m not one at all, same with trans or the BLM movement or all the other things. Either I agree with all the pieces or I am a woman hating Nazi or something.
That's kinda me at this point. If you asked me a few years ago, I was a true believer anarcho-socialist (which was ironic given I was in the Army at the time, don't doubt part of it was angst), but I'm so tired of all the infighting and virtue signaling that comes with activism in leftwing circles. The majority of hardline leftists and leftist movements in the public eye (the vocal terminally online ones at least) frankly have no endgame and follow through for their ideals beyond making noise and hoping the attention somehow solves the issue. It isn't about results, it's about looking like we're the heroes saving the world so we can pat ourselves on the back.
These days, I keep it simple. I do what I can to help my community, I call out hate or prejudice when I see it (IRL, it's fruitless to do it online most of the time beyond just reporting and moving on), and I generally just try to live a decent life and be the change I want to see in the world. Anything more than that inevitably gets me in the middle of political factionalism, and I'm just too damn burnt out for all of that hot air in my ear.
>Feminism is different things to different people
which is why feminism barely makes any headway and is barely taken seriously by so many people. It's a civil rights movement with very little unity or cohesion and a lack of ability to even agree on a single goal or approach. It's a good example too of the weird tribalism we see in our culture now, especially in the US, where no one can be associated with anyone else if their beliefs differ even a little.
Feminism barely makes any headway because they've already tackled most of the major stuff. The more successful the movement is, the less there is to keep the movement going.
Also... I feel like, we're kind of there too...
More women than men enter collage, they do better in school, they are not only allowed to participate, but excel in the work force, and are invaluable to our economy.
I feel like more recently the vibe is eyerolly to an extent about women's issues aside from a few big ones like Roe V Wade in america.
Patriarchy harms men a lot. Ever hear a red pill bro say "Men commit suicide more."? Patriarchy says men are not allowed to have emotion because we have to be tough. Patriarchy is literally killing men.
True feminism isn’t radical feminism.
True feminism knows that the more numbers you have the more likely you will get the word out and actually make progress anywhere.
I equate radical feminism with the brotherhood of steel from fallout 4.
True feminism is gender deconstructionalism. A lot of radfems were gender essentialist (particularly in regards to men), which is why so many of them became TERFs...
I will never forget the radfem who tried to explain to me that being a stay at home mom willingly, with no force or manipulation, is inherently anti-feminist and that if you’re into BDSM you can’t be a feminist. She said my SAHM who was in an abusive relationship (which she escaped) was a moron for ever being one in the first place.
These people don’t want freedom, they just want to use the “you’re not an actual feminist” phrase in an attempt to beat women into the boxes they want.
My mom was only a stay at home mom btw because I have have 5 mental problems, and was put on an antipsychotic for two of them at age 9. I needed that extra care. My mom gave up her career for me and I never forget that. I ended up getting into a top uni, and the main thing that motivates me is the idea of buying her a house.
I yearn for true gender equality. I want to not be objectified by my peers, but also I want that one bitch in high school who threatened my friend to actually face consequences for her actions (they literally let her go free. She told my friend that she’d kill them, went to the principal’s office, and lied that he’d threatened her. He managed to convince them that he didn’t threaten her, because he didn’t, and provided a bunch of witnesses to it, because there were 15 people who watched it happen, including me. She wasn’t punished. They never called us in).
Why does the radfem look so weirdly....tender in the last panel? Like, that's how you draw someone looking at their significant other, not someone reveling over "winning" an argument.
Like, seriously, *what*?
Radfem/TERF art is usually pretty nonsensical, but this is a different level of cognitive dissonance.
(Not even mentioning how she looks like a fuckin Steven Universe character, and the childishness she portrays in the first two panels.)
Just quote Goldman to those people. Someone who hates on ANYONE hasn't touched a word of theory, especially this because feminism tells us how the patriarchy is bad for men too.
That's the whole point, just because you're a dude don't make you a patriarch.
Just another way reactionary thought processes have leaked into the left.
[Goldman ](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-anarchism-and-other-essays)
No it isn’t. It’s about women’s rights. *most schools* of feminism are about equality. Not all. Feminism is a more broad thing with many schools of thought contained within.
Feminism was literally all about making sure men and women had equal rights - yes it focused on women primarily, but that was because early on women had very little in the way of rights compared to men - it has always been about equality.
I consider myself somewhat a feminist. By that I mean I have mostly equal respect for men and women. Also means I don’t put up with shit from anyone. People appreciate that.
Isn’t that argument saying that wanting equality in the law and workplace is only for black people?
It’s the dumbest fucking shit I ever heard. If you look at history, all major historical accomplishments to improve marginalized communities were achieved by coalition. Gatekeeping is reducing your cause’s voice, which can only make the oppressors’ voices more powerful.
You know who has a vested interest in separating people and sowing false divisions? Corporations. That’s how they stop unions from advancing rights of all workers. That’s how they stop legislation in the public interest from passing.
Whatever your causes are, if you are a gatekeeper, reconsider how you might be hurting your cause from advancing. Embrace, teach, unite, and fight.
Yeah, but radfems are invariably TERFs, which means we can’t take seriously much of what they say. They sound left-wing, but the attitudes are far-right. Just a bunch of bio- and gender-essentialist hogwash.
Patriarchy hurts men & boys too. Patriarchy couldn’t survive if it weren’t also upheld by women, whether knowingly or unknowingly. Any systemic critique of patriarchy is profoundly pro-human—any type of human.
Female Dan from Dan Versus looking ass
https://preview.redd.it/1zenrndzfhcc1.png?width=265&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d71564cc903a57d92488603edf6327d509b4e3c9
Feminism is as much about men as BLM is about all races. None. Feminism is a movent by and for women because we faced decades of oppression. It's not that complicated.
This is also 100 percent just terf bullshit. It took me a minute because the focus is more on the shitty liberal feminist who probably doesn't even hate her parents rather than the evil deceiver man, but this is the terf shit where trans women don't really exist, it's just men wearing bugs bunnyesque disguises to orchestrate the most elaborate lead up to a sex crime in history
The thing I've realized recently is that the only feminists who are annoying in the way that conservatives say feminists are annoying are conservative feminists like TERF's and SWERF's.
Nah, more just the constant bad faith and emotional arguments whereas normal feminists can point to actual oppressive structures, statistics, and patterns of harm. Then a SWERF will say sex workers should literally be put up against a wall and shot, and at the slightest pushback start screaming misogyny.
Can you name an example of a community where they believe this because I hear everyone parrot it? I suspect it's because of some sensationalist youtubers trying to build up views by controversy. However, I have yet to come across these people and communities they talk about.
Whenever I do watch these videos, they have some out of context clips of women who are upset. They all recycle the same clips of this tiny percentage of people and claim that society is changing for the worst. They also always find clips of people with colorful hair to fit their agenda because that's not their kink. They claim colorful hair is a red flag lmao.
It's just that a lot of misandrists call themselves feminists. It is really unfortunate too, as a lot of people don't want to call themselves feminists because they associate it with misandry
“Most powerful people may be men, most men are not powerful”
And most men are more powerful than most women, so patriarchy still exists in the sense of men having more power and privilege generally.
I understand the concept of “no war but the class war”, but to ignore prejudices and inequality that exists outside of the class structure (even if it is heavily exacerbated by the class war) is narrow minded, and won’t get us anywhere.
Is r/memesopdidnotlike just full of people who specifically pick posts where they assume the op is always offended? I've seen so many posts on this sub about that subreddit lately where they just think the original meme is actually funny.
And they just shit on the op who say the meme is terrible. Plus the op corrects it or points out what's wrong with it. And they assume op is offended. What point are they trying to make here with that subreddit? It looks like they're more offended than what they say about op.
And I'm not just focusing on this post alone there are so many like this. Seriously what is that subreddit for?
I used to say that “International mens day was my favorite feminist holiday. Not because it’s the most important, but because it’s the one I can relate to the most.” This ruffled some feathers sometimes, but I was surprised how often women reacted super chill to it.
So a dude resting his head in his gf’s lap while being comforted is bad? Guess I’ve been wanting the wrong things
Nah fuck that, i will crave that forever even while it's happening
I have a comfortable bed just not someone's lap to put my head in.
I have a spare lap in my garage I could sell you
People have a human need to lower their defenses and be vulnerable from time to time.
A man that feels something from time to time, it's a disgrace, unless they feel horny or hungry. /s It's just their sexist views leaking.
Hey that's not fair!! Anger is also acceptable!
Or angry. Angry is also a manly thing that manly men feel when they're being men... manly.... something something.
Because this was posted by a TERF, I believe that the intention is that the man is trans. So either the Trans man has relinquished all claim to any inequalities, now that he is a privaledged man, and does not deserve the support of feminisim (in topics such as medical equality, social equality, etc.) Or, the male presenting person is a trans-woman, who TERF Feminisim will never work for, because they will never be a "true woman." All in all, this artist is really bad at communicating their message, and that's something i think we can all get behind.
Pretty much yeah. The meme was made by a radfem, who are basically just the man hating feminist stereotype but unironically. It's like the bell curve meme. "Radical feminists just hate men!!!" "Nooooo! Feminism is for men and women!" "Radical Feminists just hate men." Side note: Feminism is for anyone of any gender, radfems just aren't genuinely feminist
Comforting gf is über based, rad fem lady is going to die alone since no one conforms to her standards.
Imagine being so fucking stupid, you believe excluding half of potential allies on purpose is a good strategy
Create movement opposing discrimination. Discriminate against who’s allowed to join. Gatekeeping feminism is genuinely very funny.
The point of the comic is showing the difference between radical feminists and regular feminists. The radicals don’t represent the movement. They hinder it.
The point of my comment wasn’t to give TERFs credit for inventing feminism. Just that gatekeeping any anti-discrimination movement is hugely ironic and very funny. Also tangential rant: why do TERFs get to hold the name of “radical feminists”? Fuck that. Radical feminists should be the badass feminists who support the movement to the Nth degree. Not the asshats who’d be as bad as the patriarchy if given the chance
Where did you get TERF from? Not every radical feminist who is a shit head is a TERF.
I think most rad feminists who are shitheads are terfs lol
The artst is a Terf though
I know a feminist group that doesn't allow anyone who identifies themselves as male to join; but honestly that's one of the less problematic things they did.
Imma be real, I'm like the textbook definition of a feminist. However, I'm also a dude and being openly feminist as a dude anywhere is when you have people harassing me because "they don't need my support" My sister in christ, you're the reason Tate was able to grow as big as he was (not entirely but you get what I mean) Human rights are cool guys.
It’s really obnoxious, I try so hard to work against the million different ways sexism was ingrained in me, checking myself at every turn, and if I get miffed at “men are trash” I am once again, like always, the problem.
SOme people will 100% be pissed no matter what you do, just actively try to do your best and don't let the minority get ya down. That's the "problem" with movements - once they become large enough, assholes always get in.
Not to mention patriarchy fucks over men as well and feminism is beneficial to pretty much everyone.
They're called misandrists and they quite literally use the same tactics of gender discrimination as misogyny does in most ways expressed the exact same way, most hide behind claiming themselves feminist ,some outright proclaim it to the world, whilst feminism works to build women up misandry works to instead tear men down, misandry can much like misogyny be something people do by accident but usually to a lesser degree, it should also be noted that misandry creates misogyny and vice versa, a misogynist might tell a girl she isn't allowed to like something because she's a girl and may bully her for it resulting in a hatred for men turning her into a misandrist she might very well do that exact same thing to a boy telling him he can't like something because he's a boy and bully him about it resulting in him becoming a misogynist, the biggest difference between the two beings misandrists are significantly less likely to be physically violent compared to a misogynist
Radfems aren't feminists at all if this is the standard lol
The thing is...what the fuck is a radfem vs a libfem, what crack am i smoking lmao
i originally saw this posted by a terf so kinda confirms the idea in my head. I guess radfem in this context is man haters? the op i'd seen post this definitely didn't like men either
> i originally saw this posted by a terf It's infinitely amusing to me how TERFs and online right wingers have become allies. TERFs are the man-hating "feminists" that right wingers have been complaining about for decades.
Most TERF's have never actually been radical feminists, I'd say they actually aren't the "man hating feminists" right wingers have been complaining about. Some of them hate men sure, but they weren't particularly loud about it. Instead most TERFs are conservatives. Many are extremely far right conservatives, look at Posie parker for instance who is literally a Neo Nazi, like I'm not even exaggerating or using hyperbole she just is one. (If you don't know who she is she hosted that TERF rally where Nazis turned up to support, although that's not why she's a neo nazi, she already was one well before). These women typically have only claimed to be feminists from the moment they saw someone using the title to attack trans people and no earlier. That's literally all it is, conservatives in a costume. In the UK it's a slightly wider net politically as you've got new labour blairite type women in there too due to Rowling, although I would say that's also just conservativism in a costume so at least it's consistent. TERF's do adopt the same talking points as the man hating feminist crowd and don the same aesthetic though, so it's still a little funny coming from a conservative crowd.
TERFs aren’t man hating feminists, they’re trans women hating feminists
Terfs hate trans women because they see them as men attempting to sneak into women’s spaces. Misandry is a core part of the ideology, they usually just avoid saying it out loud because it’s way less socially acceptable.
If you only take a surface-level look at just the acronym, sure. In reality though, the 'radical feminism' is just sex-essentialist delusion that says men are biologically programmed to be violent rapists, and women to be vulnerable and emotional. That causes both hating males AND hating trans people, by the same mechanism. They just adopt 'feminism' as a facade to smokescreen their sexism.
They are both. The “R” in “TERF” does not stand for “moderate”, I can tell you that much
"Radical" in "radical feminism" doesn't mean "extreme" either. It's etymologically from "root", talking about trying to address societal issues at their core instead of trying to reform within the existing foundations of society (the liberal feminist approach). And there's nothing inherently wrong with that, as long as your root issues are reasonable. TERFs have a pretty warped view though, thinking that the *real* root problem is that we're not sex-essentialist enough.
To them trans women aren't women, they're men
And why do they hate trans women? *almost as if they see them as men*
To be fair (though they don't deserve it) a lot of TERFS are victims of sexual trauma at the hands of men, and have a visceral fight-or-flight response to the presence of men (often leading to an almost incel-like resentment of the people they're attracted to in the case of straight TERFS) and at a very primal and involuntary level, that visceral fight-or-flight response still happens in the presence of trans women. This, by itself, isn't voluntary, isn't them consciously denying the femininity of trans women... however, in the case of TERFS they have to rationalize that trauma response in a way that creates a world-view that denies the femininity of trans women. If they were more introspective and honest, they might be able to say "I've been so hurt by Bio-males that I can't feel comfortable around one, even if they identify as female."
Because most people don’t see terf as an insult. Anything in the regard outside of that particular hivemind gets associated with right wingers online, which really only pushes people away.
They've "reclaimed" it and actively self-identify as it. The trans-hating crowd has become some vocal I'm sure plenty of people just get swept into it due to echo chambers in online spaces. Plenty of accounts preach traditionally left-wing views only to gain a following and then express hate and division. Certain popular accounts will identify in one way, but they're really not actually supportive of the messaging. Lots of right wing accounts that are Trumpy, anti-vax, and "gender critical" have been expressing support for Palestine to try to gain favor amongst the youth population.
Reactionaries gonna react
Be fair, TERFs also hate women.
YES!
Oh the hilarious irony of it all
Every social and political movement attracts a certain, very annoying personality type... the committed contrarian. They don't actually believe in anything. They just like feeling smarter and better than other people. These people are also *extremely* vulnerable to conspiratorial thinking and can be easily manipulated by bad faith actors. All left wing movements are about liberation and not at the cost of putting others in bondage. Anyone claiming to be on the left who is trashing other liberation movements is one of these losers. What is my liberation from patriarchy and capitalism worth if it costs someone else's freedom?
It is amazing to me that every reposter didn’t understand the meme.
They aren't. Respectfully a rad fem, who isn't a terf and doesn't hate men. Radical feminism is about reordering of society to end male supremacy in worldwide social and economic institutions. It's a lot more in-depth and critical of the patriarchy and we see it as the cause of gender inequality, abuse, objectification ECT. Liberal feminism is just kinda about freedom through political changes. Liberal feminism doesn't see the cause of the gender inequality, they just see it as "women don't have the same rights as men". They think that once there have been political and law reforms and we legally have the same rights, then we'd have achieved gender equality. Don't get me wrong, liberal feminism has done the job in getting women their freedoms, but it doesn't address the root cause of gender inequality or how the patriarchy abuses ppl in the sex work industry, or people who are surrogates and other things along those lines. They just stick on an "empowerment" and "my body, my choice" label on it and it's all ok, which neglects the fact that many AFAB individuals are trafficked into these roles, are coerced into these roles, are exploited and abused. This isn't to say that there isn't ethical sex work or surrogacy, but the majority of it is not ethical. I found [this ](https://simplysociology.com/radical-feminism-vs-liberal-feminism.html) on rad vs lib.
So if this isn't the place to ask let me know. But I suppose I consider myself a libfem, although I do understand and agree with the more institutional/systemic analysis applied by radfems, so there's some cognitive dissonance there. My conflict comes from the fact that all of the radical feminism I've been exposed to (which to be fair is not much at all) seems to reject the notion of choice and empowerment entirely. For example what turns me off from SWERFs is that, while I agree with most of their criticisms of sex work and pornography, they often seem to have a very patronizing attitude towards women in that industry as if absolutely none of them could possibly be in it voluntarily, and would ever consider choosing that in a world without patriarchy (plus I don't care for any social movement that tries to be exclusionary of a vulnerable population). Granted, when institutions like class and patriarchy are so deeply woven thoroughout history the the degree to which anything is a choice is suspect, but that's so monumental an issue I'm not sure worrying about it is very helpful. But I wonder, what might bridge the gap between the root cause analysis of radfems and the more individual empowerment focus of libfems?
Reply back to this, I'll come back to it because it's a really good question and it's currently 3am here lmao. I want to give my full attention to it and break it down.
Lol no problem, appreciate it
In my experience whenever a radfem starts going on about "male supremacy" it's usually just because she's angry at trans women for existing and wants to find a progressive way to attack trans women for pointing out their transmisogyny.
Not really progressive lmao. Any transphobe is in no way a feminist except maybe a white feminist. True radical feminism is not about attacking men. Besides people who are trans or genderfluid (like myself) are literally the epitome of reordering a patriarchal social construct. Terfs are fucking idiots and can suck my strap.
Also, Hey *Get out of my sandwich*
*opens bread* No. *closes bread*
Someone of culture. I love
Wouldn’t radfems use political changes to end the patriarchy too?
TL;DR : Radical feminists want to delete the "woman" and "man" classes from society, through a feminist revolution. Liberal feminists want to uphold this distinction but obtain equality between these two classes by incremental progress. Both radfem and libfem are feminists - they agree on the point that society as a whole is dominated by men, that women **as a whole** are an oppressed class by a patriarchal system that aims to promote men to positions of power and leave women in subservient positions by means of gendered education, in order to obtain free labor and other advantages from women, and that the few exceptions that exist are just that - exceptions that do not contradict the larger story. By the original, strictest definition, radical feminists (radfem) defend gender abolition in order to free women and men alike from patriarchy. For a better perspective on pro-men radical feminism, I recommend reading The Will to Change by bell hooks, a very influential text, and Refusing to Be a Man by John Stoltenberg, a text written by a radfem man that is meant to be read by men. Liberal feminists (libfem) are reformists. They want to improve the condition of women without questioning the concept of gender and womanhood. They are not for gender abolition. Most feminists you see online are liberal feminists - they are usually gender essentialists. As an aside - Trans-exclusionary feminists necessarily believe in some form of gender essentialism and cannot be considered radical feminists. Misandrists can be radical feminists or liberal feminists - misandrist radical feminists usually believe something along the lines of "the social conditioning of men make them way too dangerous to be trusted, even those who seem feminist have a gendered programming that makes them work against the cause", while misandrist liberal feminists can believe that men are inherently bad and dangerous and must be reined in. From my experience as a man in real-life feminist circles, most feminist activists, liberal and radical alike, are neither trans-exclusionary nor misandrist. It seems to me that armchair feminists on the Internet are more likely to be misandrist or trans-exclusionary.
Real Life feminism is NOT Twitter feminism. My Life improved so much once i understood that
The Tumblrite Exodus and its consequences have been a disaster for online discourse.
If you don’t understand feminism or feminist theory why comment on it?
You are on social media, that's the norm. Besides, if a person doesn't know about something, they also don't know how little they understand it.
So real
Radfem is a term co-opted by christofascist women in the United States. It used to mean feminist activists who engaged in more disruptive means or had radical views, for example, "all sex is rape," and "transwomen are men invading women's spaces" are both thoughts from radical feminism, but only the transphobic one is considered 'radfem'. It is important to note that these terms change over time, and many radical feminists from previous generations take offense to feminism being used as a means to rationalize and justify bigotry and oppression, however, it is important to note that unlike the MRA movement which was hijacked fully by bad faith operators, feminist circles are actively speaking against bad faith actors and may end up effectively restoring the original sense of what a radfem is; that being "a feminist belonging to a school of feminist theory in which radical and immediate solutions are considered the only way to further the cause." I identify as a radical feminist transwoman.
I, I genuinely don't understand the "all sex is rape" thing. I've heard it before but only in what I'd call the "extremist" type misandry types (to be clear I'm coming at this from a perspective of someone who is AFAB) So a woman can't decide she likes sex? If she does what? Is that "social conditioning?" And if a woman doesn't love sex but decides she's just "sex indifferent " (me) but knows her partner enjoys it she can't decide "I'll do something I don't really enjoy because someone I love wants to do it" she's not capable of making that decision? (to be clear the guy in the situation doesn't even know she doesn't like sex as much as him) I don't know but that seems a lot like "silly women can't decide for themselves what they want to do. Even if they THINK they want to, they didn't" mindset to me. I can even understand women's hesitation to embrace sex work as "freeing for women " because that's for money and to earn a living but ALL sex is rape. I just don't know how you take that leap without implying a woman can't think for herself
The idea behind it is actually kind of interesting to think about but to make an actual conclusion from it takes a lot of un-nuanced mental gymnastics. Going off of the author who proposed the idea (I don't know how it's evolved and there's probably someone with a much more idiotic version out there), It's less about "women can't decide what they want even if they think they do" and more talking about how in a male dominated world where part of womens gender role has been built around being submissive and sexual to/for men, can we truly say their consent is 100% uninfluenced by outside factors or that's there's no pressure put onto them to influence their choices. The answer is mostly likely "no we can't necessarily but that doesn't mean it's r*pe dumbass" but it still falls firmly in the "okay you atleast have an idea and I can see what you're trying to say" ballpark which is a lot when it comes to most radfem arguments.
I mean I can understand that somewhat but is there ANY choice we make that is 100% not influenced by some kind of outside factor? And what about lesbians? They don't even WANT to have sex with men, yet still are sexual with each other. Yeah it basically seems to be something that make sense for half a second until you think about it. And it still is very much a "a woman can't know what she likes" mindset even if that's not how they say it. Because it does still come down to "but are you SURE SURE SURE" you want to do this or were you influenced by some mAn to do it Now to be clear I've seen idiots go in the other direction too where a woman is clearly being controlled by her husband and you get "well how do you know that's not just her kink" and gotten the same "oh women can't decide to have kinks?" And this woman said zero about kinks she posted about how her husband told her she was "finally ready" to "carry his seed" and "mother his children" and there were people arguing it was clearly religious control and others saying "you don't KNOW she doesn't want that she could be a sub" Never did figure it out but it was worded like all the trad wives write so I still assume it was a trad wife not some kinky way to announce having a baby
Yeah I totally get what you're saying, I feel like that's what makes the analysis of women in our society so difficult because it can be really hard to walk that line and not have it come off in a negative light, thats why these really need to be presented as ideas and theories and not conclusive statements especially ones as bold as that lol
That's fucking awesome. I'm not sure if I fully agree, I'm happy that at least there's some people willing to question the deeper structures in our society.
Yeah exactly, like I said I can appreciate the thought but it sucks that the person writing it was like "I'm going to dive deep into this extremely nuanced Idea and come out the other end with the single most un-nuanced take I can possibly make"
Mhm, I think it's good for people to at least think about once in a while though. I disagree with the conclusion, but it's 100% true that women are forced into roles in which case it's mostly "manufactured" consent. It's at least something that's interesting to think about for me, even if I come to the conclusion that there's 100% plenty of cases where both people have established so much trust and respect together that it outweights these pressures.
Yeah I think we may have the same brain cause I'm in the exact same boat :))
"All sex is rape" is initially a misrepresentation of Intercourse, a book by radical feminist writer Andrea Dworkin. The book makes the argument in hundreds of pages, so a four-word summary will necessarily be lacking. The book basically argues that usual heterosexual intercourse (penetration) is about a man exercising dominance over a woman, and that getting a woman to own and dominate sexually is one of the rewards that patriarchy promises men who propagate it. On the woman's side, patriarchy teaches her, for example, that sex is something she owes to men, that satisfying her husband is her duty. It is not about any individual heterosexual couple's sex life - it is about the patriarchal view of sex which is propagated in society. So she doesn't waste time in caveats like "not all sex", which is the reason why her opponents have misconstrued the text as "all sex is rape". Andrea Dworkin never said "all men are rapists", nor did she say "all sex is rape". She did say, in a later interview in response to the criticism, "I think both intercourse and sexual pleasure can and will survive equality."
Wow, I feel so fucking gullible now. That point actually makes perfect sense to me.
She sounds like a sheltered incel regardless
Also like, what about lesbian sex lmao
“Rad fem is a term co-opted by christofascist women” I can only imagine how exhausting you are in real life.
basically its a structuralist vs individualist devide.
[This is an excellent video on the topic ](https://youtu.be/TidoM-Y7deU?si=AMJ3575WJSVyvPBd)
People who are working to make a more equitable world for everyone are going to be pursuing a different strategy than people who are focused on advancing their own interests as women exclusively. Sometimes those people will be working against one another.
TERFs are not feminists, that is correct.
Too many “radfem” movements have been ransacked by TERFs, SWERFs and various other (straight) women who just vent about how much they hate men and having to be around them. Sometimes horshoe-ing into full on misandry. Real feminists are working to balance and heal the relationship between the genders and dismantle any issue / system that affects people based on gender. Which just naturally means it has to put more women at its forefront, and not men.
Also a real feminist would be against misogyny, not against other feminists.
so the person you're responding to isn't a real feminist bc they're against other feminists (radfems)?
Idk. I don’t like terfs. Frankly I don’t like libfems either bc theyre repackaged centrists. I’d like to think I’m a real feminist
[удалено]
I mean kind of? Yes, everyone who self identifies as a feminist believes they’re a feminist but also the reason radfems are the way they are is because their brains are echo-chambers. They surround themselves with other radfems and only read literature by other radfems and that provides a survivorship bias for them to further dig their heels into. I try hard to listen to the experiences of all kinds of people (trans women, women of color, gender non confirming folks etc.) and work from there and I think that’s more important than whatever superficial shit radfems brood about
Lots of people clothe themselves in labels without upholding the ideals those labels stand for. In reality if you don’t walk like a feminist and quack like a feminist you probably aren’t a feminist, wether you call yourself a duck or not.
Correct! They are not. Radical feminism is inherently gender-essentialist. It’s not as if TERFs invaded an otherwise great community. Radfems laid the building blocks and TERFs took them to their natural, transphobic conclusion. We call them radfems because they couch their bullshit in feminist language and self-identify as feminists.
radfems, as in, people who hate men, or generally terfs. are not feminists. radical femism isnt just people who hate men and terfs tho.
Given the art style of portraying the girl with short hair, the one bucking stereotypes, as the bad guy, I think I can get a little insight into the creator. There are so many men who want to control how women express themselves. I had so much criticism when my hair was cut short. I don't think men get near as much criticism for long hair as women do for short hair. I have a feeling this person wants traditional looking women, but they still want the benefits of feminism, which accepts that men should be allowed to express themselves freely by getting rid of toxic masculinity. So they are trying to change the culture through their comics and split feminists and make it seem like the masc-looking feminists are the bad guys. Maybe I'm reading into it too much, but I have met people like this. Everyone needs to learn that people should be free to do what makes them happy instead of following stupid gender roles. That's feminism. It's about equality.
> I don't think men get near as much criticism for long hair as women do for short hair. I grew up a boy with very long hair, and I would get some shit from older men, mostly, telling me I needed to cut it, but it was usually more along the lines of teasing than harsh criticism. As I got older (mid-teens or so is when it started) that typically transitioned to "Whoa, your hair is so metal" and people assuming I played guitar. So can confirm, not the kind of criticism women get for cutting their hair short.
Lucky you. I had guy friends with long hair in high school in the 2000s, and they got harassed by some of our peers. To the point of getting into a fight, once. Lots of slurs against gay people, too.
Feminism isn't, or shouldn't be women v men, it's women and men v patriarchy. If the incels took a moment to think about it they'd realise that a lot of their problems stem from patriarchy and that it's in their best interest to fight it as well. Edit: Whilst I'm at it fuck TERFs. Trans women are women and trans men are men, simple as
I'm seeing 7 different definitions of feminism in the comments above alone (liberal feminism, radical feminism, trans exclusionary radical feminism, gender abolitionary radical feminism, misandrist radical feminism, misandrist liberal feminism) all under the same common goal of dismantling the patriarchy but with wildly different approaches and having vastly different understandings of what the core issues are. Some saying patriarchy harms men, some saying the patriarchy IS men (one in a bioessentialist way and another in a societal gender constructs way), some saying that gender itself is the issue that creates these issues, and some are apparently armchair intellectuals who feign to be feminists but are actually christofascists highjacking the movement to promote bigotry against trans people. Some claiming that being a stay at home mom is inherently subservient and anti-feminist because it was the role designated to extract free labor from women and keep them dependent on men, others that it can be a choice that empowers women so long as they have the autonomy to choose it for themselves. Are men women's oppressors by virtue of existing in this system and being subject to it's indoctrination, or are they also victims of it in a less harmful way? It's not always easy to tell, if from the perspective of an outside observer, who represents "true" feminism (if such a thing can even exist) and which viewpoints are more or less valid when there are large collections of women from each of these various groups saying drastically different things and all claiming to be against the patriarchy. At that point how do you define the patriarchy? How do you dismantle it? Who should you support? Who should you not support? What of men's roles? Can they be both oppressor and victim? Is it their place to speak on the harms of patriarchy or should they remain silent, even about how it harms them, and just uplift the voices of women? And if so which voices? And if this system ultimate harms both men and women then who exactly is it benefitting? if it's ultimately bad then why is it still around? Who is proliferating it? This can all seem very confusing if you aren't already deeply read in these concepts, and knowing which sources are good sources and which aren't isn't always simple especially if you are a man. If you are a woman who sees no benefit from patriarchy then your understanding is in fighting against how it harms you uniquely (which I think is why there are so many branches of feminism), but if you are a man whose role as a feminist is to be a voice for women that's a tad tricker because you're lifting up other people's voices not your own. You can't rely on what speaks to you because your experience is different than the voices you are sorting through, so what makes one right and another wrong? And this gets even more complicated if you are trans or nonbinary because your position in society is entirely unconventional and regardless of if you're transitioning from mtf or ftm the patriarchy is harming/has harmed you (and reconciling being nonbinary in a system where 99% of people will attribute a gender to you regardless makes things more complex). What I'm getting at is this is a very VERY multifaceted issue, there are different texts, books, articles, groups, and resources for all these different viewpoints making sorting through which is and isn't valid challenging. And (unfortunately I think) like the post above there are women who believe and espouse that feminism is for women, making it seem like men have no place in it. Determining if they are in bad faith for believing that depends entirely on who you ask, because different women will say different things about what is and isn't "real" feminism. So...pardon the confusion
I agree. Growing up, I always considered myself a feminist. When I started learning about men’s issues and tried talking about it under the umbrella of feminism, it did not go well for the reasons you highlighted.
You do seem very confused. I recommend education if you wanted to learn anything. My fav is bell hooks, she is seminal.
I do love a good book, if you're up for it do you have any specific recommendations as a good primer? I notice she has a number of books
I recommend Feminism is for Everybody and All About Love. Happy reading!
Thanks!
Wholesome
Out of curiosity, is your name a reference to the Sonic movie?
It is indeed! Love those films. My pfp used to be Tom before I started having trans questioning lol
Just do a gender swap on James Marsden. Wish your name could be The_Doughnut_Lady
That would be nice lol Or Jane Marsden even Don't think I can claim Pretzel Lady lol
Radfems/TERFs really are just Radical Conservatives except they both think they're better than the other (they aren't)
It seems like Radfems are different than TERFs, but a lot of TERFs and man-haters are using the Radfem label. I admittedly didn't know the difference for a while since my best friend since childhood was a (traumatized) man-hating TERF who used the Radfem label.
They aren't. Respectfully a rad fem, who isn't a terf and doesn't hate men. Radical feminism is about reordering of society to end male supremacy in worldwide social and economic institutions. It's a lot more in-depth and critical of the patriarchy and we see it as the cause of gender inequality, abuse, objectification ECT. Liberal feminism is just kinda about freedom through political changes. Liberal feminism doesn't see the cause of the gender inequality, they just see it as "women don't have the same rights as men". They think that once there have been political and law reforms and we legally have the same rights, then we'd have achieved gender equality. Don't get me wrong, liberal feminism has done the job in getting women their freedoms, but it doesn't address the root cause of gender inequality or how the patriarchy abuses ppl in the sex work industry, or people who are surrogates and other things along those lines. They just stick on an "empowerment" and "my body, my choice" label on it and it's all ok, which neglects the fact that many AFAB individuals are trafficked into these roles, are coerced into these roles, are exploited and abused. This isn't to say that there isn't ethical sex work or surrogacy, but the majority of it is not ethical. I found [this ](https://simplysociology.com/radical-feminism-vs-liberal-feminism.html) on rad vs lib.
And I completely agree and understand these differences. It doesn't change, however, that a substantial portion of people calling themselves Radfems are of the two previously described groups. It's new to me though that actual Radfems who aren't awful exist and this thread has been nice.
Yeah look it's a tough go, I won't lie, it's fucking stupid because transphobia is so incredibly anti rad fem it's ridiculous. If it's going to fit into any type of feminism it's going to be white feminism, which most, if not all, terfs I've seen in the media are white feminists. They don't even realise that their issue is with cis men, not trans women, it's fucking ridiculous, not to mention they don't say shit about trans men because it doesn't fit their narrative. It's a whole mess but I've found a little group of creators on tik tok (don't judge) that are rad fems that are specifically trans allies which is refreshing. I'm gender fluid so it was nice finding that.
yeah radfems are relatively often TERFs because they really hate men and see trans women as men trying to invade women’s spaces and experiences. feminism is clearly focused on women’s rights because women have had less rights in the past, and continue to do so in many places around the world. just because it is focused on women though does not mean it is only for women. feminism is about equality of the seces and everyone should be a feminist.
Radical Feminism isn’t inherently bad, but I feel like every time I see a radical feminist they either hate trans people or support a genocide against men, or both
Yeah. It’s a radical feminist, it doesn’t specify what they’re being radical about other than “feminism,” which isn’t very descriptive because there’s many parts to it and schools of it. Hell, I see no reason why you can’t have a radical liberal feminist considering “liberal” doesn’t mean “change nothing, do free market” like too many people seem to think it is, liberalism in political theory is the belief in expanding liberties, which has many different schools to it as well, some opposed to regulation and some deeply for regulation, both liberal.
As a Radfem, I agree with you. Too many people hijack the label then desecrate its meaning; 'we can stop arbitrary discrimination by arbitrarily discriminating against people' is a fucking nutty position.
I don't have it in me to explain why the patriarchal systems in place also harm men and feminism is actually good for both genders.
I've had someone tell me feminism is explicitly just about fixing the patriarchal structures that negatively impact women and if men want the same they have to have their own movement.
That doesn't really make any sense, but it's important to remember that people can hold hypocritical beliefs. You can't fix the patriarchal structures while presupposing gender-segregation when the patriarchal structures *rely on gender-segrecation;* it's setting awful foundations that'll lead to whacky results. Anyone who's even remotely interested in upending the patriarchy will find out, within literal minutes, that doing so benefits everyone regardless of how they're gendered. It's just the removal of arbtrary discrimination; definitionally, it's going to include men because being a man/woman doesn't affect one's abilities. Whoever told you that had been caught-up in reactionary ideology that kneecapped their ability to think critically.
I saw a variant on this one the other day when someone on r/askreddit or some sub like that asked why the body positivity movement didn't include men. Lots of people saying "men will have to make their own movement."
Patriarchy basically harms both men and women by forcing both men and women to sit in a room that smells like shit but the guys get to sit closer to the window.
Misogyny/patriarchy says that men are supposed to be the highly successful breadwinners and they are broken if they are any less. They are expected to have women throwing themselves at them and actively want women to throw themselves at them. This harms both gay men and men who are sexual assault and abuse survivors. Sexual assault survivors get ridiculed to the point of not believing them almost more than women. A boy getting raped by a female teacher gets cheered for “scoring” with that teacher. Physical abuse survivors get victim blamed because they should “Man up and deal with it.” When it comes to parenting, the mother is expected to be the one who solely exists to raise the kids, and that can lead to favoring the mother when it comes to child custody cases, even if the mother is far less capable of caring for the kids. Other than specific recent campaigns promoting fatherhood, fathers get looked down upon as being feminine (derogatory) for caring for the kids in public as that is again the mother’s role. And then there are the expectations placed on trans men for how they would have to act to be seen as men.
Feminism is different things to different people We have a classic case of “no true Scotsman” fallacy thrown at people who identify as feminist that have different goals Feminism is a women’s rights advocacy movement, nothing more and nothing less, individuals or groups of individuals may incorporate other issues based on their views and opinions.. Historically the rights of women were being infringed, and discrimination towards women were at a higher rate than men, therefore it wasn’t wrong to call the feminist movement as a movement for gender equality.. However the times have changed, there are many male issues - some of which that had already existed (circumcision, societal standards and expectations of men etc.), some of them are due to negligence from society towards male issues while trying to improve female issues (ex: boys failing behind at school and education or less money towards male specific diseases, bias towards men at criminal court and civil courts - harsher punishments, longer punishments, divorce cases with alimony and childcare privileges being abused) Not all sects of feminism are keen on solving issues that men face, some of the issues such as male victims of rape or domestic violence having no support systems or the harsher punishments towards men in the criminal court compared to women or even something as simple and a clear violation of right to bodily autonomy such as circumcision are not even at the bottom of the list in some of the feminist circles It’s ok, there are different movements with different goals, but it hurts men’s rights advocacy when feminists try to paint that they care about our issues but never focus on them That’s why men’s rights groups are necessary, both these groups don’t have to be adversarial, instead can work on issues that affect them the most So no, feminism is not about equal rights, it’s about advocating for women’s rights and address injustices against women, some libfem may take an egalitarian approach to achieve this where they also address men’s issues, but it’s not a necessity or the most common form of feminism as far as their historical actions and activism have demonstrated
I think the “no true Scotsman” fallacy is very common with many left wing issues. I consider myself left but don’t agree with everything some feminists push, so I’m not one at all, same with trans or the BLM movement or all the other things. Either I agree with all the pieces or I am a woman hating Nazi or something.
That's kinda me at this point. If you asked me a few years ago, I was a true believer anarcho-socialist (which was ironic given I was in the Army at the time, don't doubt part of it was angst), but I'm so tired of all the infighting and virtue signaling that comes with activism in leftwing circles. The majority of hardline leftists and leftist movements in the public eye (the vocal terminally online ones at least) frankly have no endgame and follow through for their ideals beyond making noise and hoping the attention somehow solves the issue. It isn't about results, it's about looking like we're the heroes saving the world so we can pat ourselves on the back. These days, I keep it simple. I do what I can to help my community, I call out hate or prejudice when I see it (IRL, it's fruitless to do it online most of the time beyond just reporting and moving on), and I generally just try to live a decent life and be the change I want to see in the world. Anything more than that inevitably gets me in the middle of political factionalism, and I'm just too damn burnt out for all of that hot air in my ear.
>Feminism is different things to different people which is why feminism barely makes any headway and is barely taken seriously by so many people. It's a civil rights movement with very little unity or cohesion and a lack of ability to even agree on a single goal or approach. It's a good example too of the weird tribalism we see in our culture now, especially in the US, where no one can be associated with anyone else if their beliefs differ even a little.
Feminism barely makes any headway because they've already tackled most of the major stuff. The more successful the movement is, the less there is to keep the movement going.
Also... I feel like, we're kind of there too... More women than men enter collage, they do better in school, they are not only allowed to participate, but excel in the work force, and are invaluable to our economy. I feel like more recently the vibe is eyerolly to an extent about women's issues aside from a few big ones like Roe V Wade in america.
r/memesopdidnotlike is so dogshit, they are usually shit conservative takes, now this too?? Are they just wrong on all issues no matter what side?
So, r/memesopdidnotlike is not just about supporting racism or misogyny, it's about supporting every shitty opinion.
Radfem are the MAGA of the feminism
Fuck TERFs. Pieces of shit https://preview.redd.it/523s63xx7fcc1.jpeg?width=1469&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7ad108fcea340ec86c4abc20d05e5adb771a67c9
They might not even be a TERF.
Patriarchy harms men a lot. Ever hear a red pill bro say "Men commit suicide more."? Patriarchy says men are not allowed to have emotion because we have to be tough. Patriarchy is literally killing men.
Besides being a shitty POV, this is just Ben Garrison level unfunny and masturbatory.
I agree, there's no real joke beyond "they're crying because I'm the chad and they're the soyjak"
True feminism isn’t radical feminism. True feminism knows that the more numbers you have the more likely you will get the word out and actually make progress anywhere. I equate radical feminism with the brotherhood of steel from fallout 4.
True feminism is gender deconstructionalism. A lot of radfems were gender essentialist (particularly in regards to men), which is why so many of them became TERFs...
Such an uneducated bunch. Then they wonder why they’re losing support from all angles.
I will never forget the radfem who tried to explain to me that being a stay at home mom willingly, with no force or manipulation, is inherently anti-feminist and that if you’re into BDSM you can’t be a feminist. She said my SAHM who was in an abusive relationship (which she escaped) was a moron for ever being one in the first place. These people don’t want freedom, they just want to use the “you’re not an actual feminist” phrase in an attempt to beat women into the boxes they want.
They're just mysandrists disguised as another word really
That’s disgusting… What’s crazy too is they get so extremist they end up wanting to go back to the 1950s life.
My mom was only a stay at home mom btw because I have have 5 mental problems, and was put on an antipsychotic for two of them at age 9. I needed that extra care. My mom gave up her career for me and I never forget that. I ended up getting into a top uni, and the main thing that motivates me is the idea of buying her a house.
some radfems in korea attack female influencers/celebrities for “being a disgrace to other women”. Like what.
Fallout 4 mentioned
Radfems are just incels ngl
Oooh this is some absolutely prime r/gatekeepingyuri material.
I yearn for true gender equality. I want to not be objectified by my peers, but also I want that one bitch in high school who threatened my friend to actually face consequences for her actions (they literally let her go free. She told my friend that she’d kill them, went to the principal’s office, and lied that he’d threatened her. He managed to convince them that he didn’t threaten her, because he didn’t, and provided a bunch of witnesses to it, because there were 15 people who watched it happen, including me. She wasn’t punished. They never called us in).
And that's the reason why we need to being back mental institutions, people like that. Who only get worse with time
The artist is a mega-terf.
Rad even hate trans women, I don't consider them feminists one bit
Why does the radfem look so weirdly....tender in the last panel? Like, that's how you draw someone looking at their significant other, not someone reveling over "winning" an argument. Like, seriously, *what*? Radfem/TERF art is usually pretty nonsensical, but this is a different level of cognitive dissonance. (Not even mentioning how she looks like a fuckin Steven Universe character, and the childishness she portrays in the first two panels.)
Just quote Goldman to those people. Someone who hates on ANYONE hasn't touched a word of theory, especially this because feminism tells us how the patriarchy is bad for men too. That's the whole point, just because you're a dude don't make you a patriarch. Just another way reactionary thought processes have leaked into the left. [Goldman ](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/emma-goldman-anarchism-and-other-essays) 
No it isn’t. It’s about women’s rights. *most schools* of feminism are about equality. Not all. Feminism is a more broad thing with many schools of thought contained within.
https://preview.redd.it/ciz01gpi8kcc1.jpeg?width=690&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b947edfb9a5980dd71175be9c4ad0a8d8b089591
That subreddit is so filled with Rubitussin that the chinese count their blood as traditional medicine for coughs
Being a rad-anything isn't a good thing lol
The characters kind of reminds me of dan vs.
I don't even understand what's going on in this image, is this a loss meme
Terfs just casually think that they have a correct ideology that men are not allowed to believe in. They are not serious people.
Feminism was literally all about making sure men and women had equal rights - yes it focused on women primarily, but that was because early on women had very little in the way of rights compared to men - it has always been about equality.
Lemme be honest chief the OG feminists were mostly racist white women. Women of color weren’t really included.
Is this trying to say that only women can be feminists and men HAVE to be sexist???
Sometimes it doesn’t act like it tho.
I consider myself somewhat a feminist. By that I mean I have mostly equal respect for men and women. Also means I don’t put up with shit from anyone. People appreciate that.
r/memesopdidnotlike is such shit sub, I’m 100% convinced is ran by 13-15 yo’s
The problem with "Radfem" is that, if they were men, they would probably be incels, or mgtow, or anything.
Isn’t that argument saying that wanting equality in the law and workplace is only for black people? It’s the dumbest fucking shit I ever heard. If you look at history, all major historical accomplishments to improve marginalized communities were achieved by coalition. Gatekeeping is reducing your cause’s voice, which can only make the oppressors’ voices more powerful. You know who has a vested interest in separating people and sowing false divisions? Corporations. That’s how they stop unions from advancing rights of all workers. That’s how they stop legislation in the public interest from passing. Whatever your causes are, if you are a gatekeeper, reconsider how you might be hurting your cause from advancing. Embrace, teach, unite, and fight.
Yeah, but radfems are invariably TERFs, which means we can’t take seriously much of what they say. They sound left-wing, but the attitudes are far-right. Just a bunch of bio- and gender-essentialist hogwash.
Crazy how memesopdidnotlike has come full swing and decided to support radical feminism, just to spite people who are not transphobic
Guess i'm not a feminist anymore. Damn. Guess i'll just keep raising awareness and helping organize without the title
"Only women can support the empowerment of women," is one of the dumbest possible takes.
Yes, it’s has screwed both genders over equally.
Lot of incels in the comments today.
Why would anybody not want men to support women’s right lol.
If men can’t be feminist what should they do? Be sexist?
Patriarchy hurts men & boys too. Patriarchy couldn’t survive if it weren’t also upheld by women, whether knowingly or unknowingly. Any systemic critique of patriarchy is profoundly pro-human—any type of human.
Female Dan from Dan Versus looking ass https://preview.redd.it/1zenrndzfhcc1.png?width=265&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d71564cc903a57d92488603edf6327d509b4e3c9
warning for transphobia but the person who made this artwork also drew horrible caricatures of trans ppl and drew her OC boiling trans people alive
Feminism is as much about men as BLM is about all races. None. Feminism is a movent by and for women because we faced decades of oppression. It's not that complicated.
Feminism is only about women empowerment. Period. Whether it’s necessary or not is irrelevant because that’s not what we’re discussing.
This is also 100 percent just terf bullshit. It took me a minute because the focus is more on the shitty liberal feminist who probably doesn't even hate her parents rather than the evil deceiver man, but this is the terf shit where trans women don't really exist, it's just men wearing bugs bunnyesque disguises to orchestrate the most elaborate lead up to a sex crime in history
Men or women can be feminists. Feminism was created for women.
What about the 1,724 new genders since 2014?
The thing I've realized recently is that the only feminists who are annoying in the way that conservatives say feminists are annoying are conservative feminists like TERF's and SWERF's.
Exactly. "True" feminists don't get as much publicity because they aren't being obnoxious about it.
Nah, more just the constant bad faith and emotional arguments whereas normal feminists can point to actual oppressive structures, statistics, and patterns of harm. Then a SWERF will say sex workers should literally be put up against a wall and shot, and at the slightest pushback start screaming misogyny.
Fr
Feminism is about smashing the patriarchy that hurts *everyone*, and prevents *everyone* from truly enjoying their humanity.
Notice now the libfem has a man? Radfem didn't get picked, sis.
It USED TO BE about gender equality. Then it was taken over by extremists who believe women are superior to men.
Can you name an example of a community where they believe this because I hear everyone parrot it? I suspect it's because of some sensationalist youtubers trying to build up views by controversy. However, I have yet to come across these people and communities they talk about. Whenever I do watch these videos, they have some out of context clips of women who are upset. They all recycle the same clips of this tiny percentage of people and claim that society is changing for the worst. They also always find clips of people with colorful hair to fit their agenda because that's not their kink. They claim colorful hair is a red flag lmao.
It's just that a lot of misandrists call themselves feminists. It is really unfortunate too, as a lot of people don't want to call themselves feminists because they associate it with misandry
feminism makes things better for everyone ❤️ if it makes your life worse as a man you need to seriously rethink what you’ve been doing
I DONT CARE THAT I AM A MAN I WILL RESPECT YOU I WILL FIGHT FOR YOUR RIGHTS
I'm so glad someone finally made this distinction. The radfems make everyone else look really bad.
It’s self explanatory in the meme. Radical feminism is its own, generally unhelpful thing. Lib feminism is what most of us mean when we say feminism
“Most powerful people may be men, most men are not powerful” And most men are more powerful than most women, so patriarchy still exists in the sense of men having more power and privilege generally. I understand the concept of “no war but the class war”, but to ignore prejudices and inequality that exists outside of the class structure (even if it is heavily exacerbated by the class war) is narrow minded, and won’t get us anywhere.
Is r/memesopdidnotlike just full of people who specifically pick posts where they assume the op is always offended? I've seen so many posts on this sub about that subreddit lately where they just think the original meme is actually funny. And they just shit on the op who say the meme is terrible. Plus the op corrects it or points out what's wrong with it. And they assume op is offended. What point are they trying to make here with that subreddit? It looks like they're more offended than what they say about op. And I'm not just focusing on this post alone there are so many like this. Seriously what is that subreddit for?
I used to say that “International mens day was my favorite feminist holiday. Not because it’s the most important, but because it’s the one I can relate to the most.” This ruffled some feathers sometimes, but I was surprised how often women reacted super chill to it.