The term feminism does essentialize the advocating for the equal rights of women (this is good actually), but it is also important to note that while this is a feminist community, this community is not about feminism. This community is about men and their specific liberation from oppressive gender roles and stereotypes.
this post was submitted on 08 Apr 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
Men's Liberation
1850 readers
1 users here now
This community is first and foremost a feminist community for men and masc people, but it is also a place to talk about men’s issues with a particular focus on intersectionality.
Rules
Everybody is welcome, but this is primarily a space for men and masc people
Non-masculine perspectives are incredibly important in making sure that the lived experiences of others are present in discussions on masculinity, but please remember that this is a space to discuss issues pertaining to men and masc individuals. Be kind, open-minded, and take care that you aren't talking over men expressing their own lived experiences.
Be productive
Be proactive in forming a productive discussion. Constructive criticism of our community is fine, but if you mainly criticize feminism or other people's efforts to solve gender issues, your post/comment will be removed.
Keep the following guidelines in mind when posting:
- Build upon the OP
- Discuss concepts rather than semantics
- No low effort comments
- No personal attacks
Assume good faith
Do not call other submitters' personal experiences into question.
No bigotry
Slurs, hate speech, and negative stereotyping towards marginalized groups will not be tolerated.
No brigading
Do not participate if you have been linked to this discussion from elsewhere. Similarly, links to elsewhere on the threadiverse must promote constructive discussion of men’s issues.
Recommended Reading
- The Will To Change: Men, Masculinity, And Love by bell hooks
- Politics of Masculinities: Men in Movements by Michael Messner
Related Communities
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The reason I'm not a feminist is because while feminism says it advocates for equal rights for women, in actuality it's advocating for more power for women.
When women are unfairly discriminated against (which is most of the time), fighting for more power for women is equivalent in outcome to fighting for equal rights. But in those situations where men get the short end of the stick, feminism is supremely unconcerned.
Feminism is not concerned with equality. It is concerned with better outcomes for women. It's a subtle but important difference. And it means it's an ideology that as a man I can mostly support but cannot subscribe to. Feminism does not care that the vast majority of workplace deaths are men. Feminism does not care that boys are failing school at unprecedented rates. It's not their issue, and that's fine, but don't pretend feminism is for everyone. BLM is sympathetic to Indian rights movements but it is not their issue. LGBT+ groups are sympathetic to unions but it is not their issue.
My struggles as a man are not feminism's issue. And that's fine. But we shouldn't pretend otherwise. We need our own group, separate from feminism.
Feminism does not care that the vast majority of workplace deaths are men. Feminism does not care that boys are failing school at unprecedented rates.
...
My struggles as a man are not feminism’s issue.
I think you'd be surprised. The vast majority of those who actually cover these topics are feminists, doing academic feminism.
Academic feminism, much like any other "-ism", has little connection to real life and what everyday adherents of the "-ism" believe or do.
I don't factor academic feminism into my thinking at all, because it's so far removed from today's reality on the ground. Feminism is what the majority of feminists make it.
The majority of feminists are at least drawing from feminist works (even if the knowledge comes secondhand). When progress is made, it is made at the academic level.
I disagree. I think progress is largely made at the ballot box and on the airwaves. Academic feminists are not scientists in a lab discovering new things. They're also not leaders of the movement. They're just academics. Over time, some academic points do filter to the broader movement but it's a trickle compared to the action of everyday feminists.
You need to read some Bell Hooks brother
Non feminist male communities tend to devolve into misogynistic places. What exactly is your problem with feminism, except the name?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism
"Feminism holds the position that societies prioritize the male point of view and that women are treated unjustly in these societies."
It's not about equality if it favors one sex over the other.
You never see feminists complaining about the draft or female employment in sanitation industries, for example.
Trying to conflate "feminism" with "equality among the sexes" is just a subversive tactic used by feminists to fool men into thinking they care about injustices towards men.
They don't. In fact, most of them proudly laugh if anyone even mentions something along the lines of "injustices towards men."
I'm interested in discussing men's issues with feminists. I don't have nearly as much interest in hearing the view points of anti-feminists. Red pill and MRA spaces are decidedly boring because anti-feminists have taken over the discourse.
In short, I support labeling this a feminist community.
Oh look, he's 95% of the way to the general incel stuff. Say "family court" next!
Sure. From my point of view man and women both struggle from the same societal structures, be it in quite different ways. Feminism addressees those societal structures from the perspective of women and in more recent times other marginalized groups. While sure it's not a lens specifically developed to view male issues, for me personally it's been a helpful tool to emphasize with women in general and to question societal or interpersonal structures in general (like man has to be the provider for the family or what the hell is family anyway?). You have a rather antagonistic view on feminism, maybe based on your own negative experiences or maybe influenced by certain media bubbles. So you might not find the discussions in this community very helpful.
"If you are used to privilige, equality feels like a threat"
I could write a lot more on how and why, but this sums it up nicely.
Not really.
Hey! I just happened upon this post and saw a few of your comments. It sounds like you have experienced some stuff that isn't fair, and it makes sense to feel hurt. That is not an uncommon experience.
Do you have someone to talk to about all that? It legit helps.
Not trying to push you to do anything you don't want to do btw, just checking in on ya :)
Here's the way I think about:
The real objective is, or should be, equality in all things that are not explicitly biological in nature and equitable treatment even in those. Thus, none of us should be excluded from the halls of power or anywhere else based on our biology even as things like health care are tailored to our biology.
That would seem to argue against a place called "men's liberation." The reality, however, is that we have only nicely begun the journey. Both men and women have much baggage to discard by virtue of both historical and current cultural and legal norms.
Those cultural and legal norms have imposed different behaviours, thought patterns, and roles. Men and women have different sets of baggage to deal with, so it only makes sense to find our allies in our journeys among those who share a common burden.
I am a male. I have rarely been excluded from women's liberation groups when I try to learn and have occasionally found that my perspective was appreciated. I would hope that the same thing is happening here.
I hope that we are all working toward a more equitable and more egalitarian society, but we won't get there by ignoring the real differences between men and women that have been imposed by culture and law. We cannot fix what we do not acknowledge.
What would you prefer and why?
There's already a word, egalitarian.
This doesn’t specify you’re discussing issues around gender though.
Personally I am not bothered by the word feminism but in general I find this type of minute language critiquing to not be very useful. I care more for the meanings and intentions behind words than their etymology. Feminism is a word that is almost universally used to mean egalitarianism regarding gender, and it has a long history and deep literature in support of that idea. For those reasons, I don’t think there will be consensus around changing it but if there was I would go along with it. As I said, it doesn’t seem like a very important issue here.
Agree, it is a waste of energy to argue semantics.
Feminism in itself just wants to achieve true equality in all regards for Man and Women (and people outside the norm)
Its what we all need.
If it's about equality, then it shouldn't a word that has clear preference for one sex.
There is a history behind the term and why it is used.
Well, it's important to recognize that the term is distinct from egalitarian. The term feminism does essentialize the advocating for the equal rights of women, but it is also important to note that while this is a feminist community, this community is not about feminism. This community is about men and their specific liberation from oppressive gender roles and stereotypes.
The “the word implies women superiority” argument has to be the proverbial dead horse that gets beaten with a stick, when it comes to feminism, at this point…
Then, you should probably be able to respond to it easily instead of dismissing it.
I don’t see a point to me doing it yet again, when it has already been many times over, in better words than I could, in this one thread and beyond. The men’s lib movement this community is about is by definition, if not outright feminist, very feminist adjacent and aligns on many views. This is not the “men’s rights” movement.
For what it’s worth, if you are actually asking for my take and not an info dump, IMHO, the semantic argument is rarely very strong. In practice, tons of the societal issues women face align with men’s, for example on their very opposition on traditional roles.
I like "feminist adjacent community for men". I'm a fan of that.
I don't like "feminist community for men".
95% of the time, anyone concerned with men's struggles should agree with feminist takes.
I just don't want us to be beholden to the 5%.
My point was pretty much that I don’t feel like semantics are really beholding anything. There’s just no end to following that logic. The other commenter accused me of being ashamed of defending men’s interests because of my position. Isn’t this literally being ashamed of calling myself feminist cause I disagree with the extremist minority? If you’re 95% of a feminist, you’re pretty much a feminist. There’s disagreement even internally to pretty much every movement out there. Not everyone agrees on everything.
That "pretty much" is huge imo. It gives us wiggle room to disagree without also attempting to win the rest of feminism over to our side.
I’m genuinely confused as to why one would need “wiggle room” for anything, who we need to “win over”, and what is that “side” you’re referring to.
Movements as large as feminism have plenty of internal disagreement. There’s no party line, no code of conduct, it’s a bunch of people fighting over similar principles. Do you agree with literally everything from every movement or political allegiance you associate with?
I don't want to be part of the feminist movement because I vehemently disagree with some of the things feminists do. I don't want us to be called to task for those things, or have to explain them or implicitly support them. I don't want to have to say "we" when talking about feminist theories or actions.
I still genuinely don’t understand how this is any different than basically any other ideological affiliation.
Which is why you should choose your affiliations carefully, especially for a fledgling movement that is still finding its ideological footing. I think men's lib is something that should be seen as closely aligned with, but distinct from, feminism.
The men’s liberation movement ranges back from the 60s, developing pretty much at the same time as second-wave feminism. The movement as an official legal entity isn’t a thing now, but it used to be openly pro-feminist. The men’s right movement literally rose from a chunk of the liberation movement that left because of exactly this.
And then we abandoned it to the Andrew Tates of the world. Because it threatened feminist moral supremacy.
If semantics isn't a real problem, why do you oppose the changing of semantics so desperately to the point of insulting/diminishing those that discuss it?
You're literally part of a "men's right group" while simultaneously using the literal phrase for it as an insult because of Toxic Feminism.
The first step of an inclusive society that listens to each others issues is already being failed by your ideology that is asking it of others. The feminist movement that inherently shits on men's rights are in no way representative of an inclusive group of left minded people. Recently, these groups are being labeled as the new right wing online pipeline for women.
It seems like you want to have and eat cake here.
If it is such a common problem, why is there no common inclusive response?
Re-read my last comment, follow the link, read some definitions. You either missed or skipped the point I made on my previous comment that we are not on a “men’s rights group”. You’re kind of illustrating my point for me here. Feel free to point out at the “insult” I made, I’ll gladly retract if there is genuinely one. I can’t find it.
You're misreading my response. The "men's rights group" is the insult I'm talking about.
You are ashamed to participate in advocating for men because of Toxic feminist perspectives I'm addressing.
I’m sorry, but I think it’s the other way around. As I mentioned in my previous comments, “men’s liberation” and “men’s rights” just both happen to be names referring to specific movements that both advocate for men’s interests, but largely disagree on the causes.
If you still genuinely think I’m somehow ashamed of advocating for men just cause I don’t agree with the ideas of the MRM in particular, this idea that feminism as a whole is somehow either obsoleted by the existence its extremist elements, rather than just being a parallel fight, then… what are we arguing over, exactly?
I feel like I wrote what I intended to say very specifically and then clarified when there was confusion about our disagreement.
Feel free to address my point about how the phrase "men's rights" became such a toxic branded phrase due to an ideology that hated men having any form of organized action addressing the harms men face.
It was a label created outside pointed inwards. By definition, this is a "men's rights movement" space, and an outside force is equally capable of branding it under the same title for the exact same reasons.
The disagreement here was your unity with said toxic viewpoints.
I feel like all of this has now been written out 3 times, so I will wait for you to respond to it before engaging further.
"Men's rights" has literally always had a toxic connotation.
The term "men's rights" was used at least as early as February 1856 when it appeared in Putnam's Magazine. The author was responding to the issue of women's rights, calling it a "new movement for social reform, and even for political revolution", which the author proposed to counter with men's rights.[12] Ernest Belfort Bax wrote The Legal Subjection of Men in 1896, deriding the women's rights movement as a farcical effort by women—the "privileged sex"—to prove they were "oppressed."
There are many communities for the problems woman face, this one is for man. Whats the problem?
No, because the word itself is not the problem. You think it's a problem because it starts with "fem" and immediately think it's all about female power when it's not. I suggest learning more about it before drawing these conclusions.
Words matter.
Right, and words have meaning.