RE: What does contemporary feminism do for men?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: What does contemporary feminism do for men?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: What does contemporary feminism do for men?

Page: << < prev 4 5 6 [7] 8 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: What does contemporary feminism do for men? - 9/9/2013 6:37:36 AM

Zonie63

Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline

FR

Just to play devil's advocate, for those saying that feminism does nothing for men, why would men even want to support it? Is it just an indulgence which men gave to women? It's not as if men were forced to go along with it (no one pointed a gun to our heads or anything), and if men really wanted to remain total patriarchal chauvinists, the old paradigm probably would have remained.

Of course, I can see the idea of standing up for the principles of equality and justice for their own sake, but I can also see the OP's point in that politics is also about quid pro quo. He might see male acceptance of feminism as men making concessions to women without expecting or demanding anything in return. In some ways, I think it's kind of noble and righteous that enough men in society supported equality for its own sake, without expecting anything in return, but doing it just because it's the right thing to do.

So, one might well wonder why there are even radical feminists at all or why feminism even took that direction at all after the 1980s. Why would there have been a "third wave" of feminism? Weren't the first two waves good enough? I sometimes wonder about those feminists who have been born since 1980, comparing their situation with the plight of women in previous eras. It does seem a bit hard to swallow when college age feminists of today try to pass off the notion that they are personally oppressed in the same way that women of the past were oppressed.

The other side of the coin in the OP's question is also in the general focus of feminism regarding women in leadership roles in society. Male leaders have often felt directed and duty-bound to consider the needs of all people in society, both men and women. When people say that feminism does nothing for men, it seems to imply that female leaders in society have no such obligation. It's like saying that women in leadership roles in society do not have to consider the needs of all people, only the needs of females. I don't think that's true, but that seems to be the message that's being sent.

That's why I don't think it's correct to say that feminism does nothing for men. After all, by ensuring that women have an equal role in society, we're adding their intelligence and talents to our society overall, from which we can only benefit. Perhaps a woman doctor might find a vaccine for cancer. Perhaps a woman president might be a political genius who can bring about a world of peace and plenty. I see feminism as a more practical and logical choice from a male point of view, so the idea that feminism is not supposed to do anything for men is a somewhat short-sighted view, in my opinion.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
It is a fringe element, which achieved a little influence within the feminist movement in the 70s, and has been in sharp decline ever since. Nowadays, almost every feminist I know regards it as an embarrassing historical hangover from the ideological excesses of that era.

I never thought that 70s was all that ideologically excessive. It might seem that way in retrospect, although to some degree, I think there was a sincere desire towards ideological consistency and genuine equality between the sexes. However "excessive" or "strange" it might have seemed, at least I felt I could understand it better and got a better handle on what feminists were asking for at the time. I didn't really see the same kinds of double standards that the OP might be addressing regarding present-day feminism.

For example, I remember during the 1970s, a lot of women dressed more like men, as they wanted to be seen as true equals and not as sex objects. This was a big deal back then, as I recall. But in the 1980s, that idea was seemingly thrown to the four winds, as popular culture ostensibly to something more symbolized by the Madonna era and after. Women started to dress less like men and more like Madonna, making some men wonder, "Well, do they wanted to be treated as sex objects or don't they?" An honest bit of confusion was taking place. Also during the 1980s, political correctness descended and public dialogue was no longer as frank and open as it was during the 1970s. So, I started to wonder about what was going on, but we couldn't really talk about it in any frank or honest way for fear of being branded a "sexist."

Then I remember an incident at Mills College around 1990, a former all-female college where the board of trustees announced that they were going to start accepting male students. There was a big hullabaloo over that one, as the all-female student body came out in a huge howling protest against it, as if the idea of male students would intrude upon their own private domain. At that point, I thought to myself, what gives? Women had worked hard to break the barriers and enter formerly all-male domains, yet now, they seemed to be changing the rules midstream. I could understand the 1970s a helluva lot better than I could understand things like that.

(in reply to thezeppo)