Time apologizes for trying to ban "feminism"

[Siegehammer]

Time Magazine has issued an apology for suggesting that the word “feminism” should be banned.

…the word ‘feminist’ should not have been included in a list of words to ban. While we meant to invite debate about some ways the word was used this year, that nuance was lost, and we regret that its inclusion has become a distraction from the important debate over equality and justice.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Sounds like they were trying to piggyback on that Harry Potter gal’s speech at the UN that spoke negatively of the term. I think Time probably has a lot more it should apologize for through the years, though.

 

[styrgwillidar]

Time Magazine has issued an apology for suggesting that the word “feminism” should be banned.

Dumbest apology ever. It was the readers who voted for it more than any other term. Instead of apologizing they should do some of that good old journalism investigating – Why? Why did folks vote for it. Could be an interesting and lengthy article on the various waves of feminism, point out the factions and radical feminists vs what the 1st wave feminists were interested in. The war on conservative women and how they’re treated etc.

 

[PrayerShark]

I guess if we had true gender equality then the term (and ergo movement) would no longer be needed.

styrgwillidar:

The war on conservative women and how they’re treated etc.

There’s a war on conservative women?

 

[AnnArbor]

I guess if we had true gender equality then the term (and ergo movement) would no longer be needed.

There’s a war on conservative women?

No.

 

[Scottgun]

There’s a war on conservative women?

Well, in the kooky world of feminism, a conservative women is similar to the happy slave in the 19th-century South. An unwitting tool of the oppressive patriarchy for which the path to freedom lies in taking feminist sacraments like contraception and abortion.

 

[MarcoPolo]

true gender equality

What does this mean?

 

[styrgwillidar]

I guess if we had true gender equality then the term (and ergo movement) would no longer be needed.

There’s a war on conservative women?

Again, the problem is that feminism long ago evolved from gender equality (equal pay, respect, opportunity- which to a great extent have been achieved in the US time.com/3222543/5-feminist-myths-that-will-not-die/?utm_content=bufferde4a9&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer exposingfeminism.wordpress.com/the-ten-most-common-feminist-myths/) to male bashing and worse. Read the works in the curriculum of any women’s studies program at a major university and you’ll understand why many women are hesitating to identify as feminists.

You’re in Australia, although I’ve visited it was only for a few days so I honestly don’t know the situation there. Although everyone was very friendly and hospitable.

A few threads on here have explored a fairly simple concept- if two people drink together and then have sex shouldn’t both be held equally accountable for the situation? Modern third wave feminists say no, it’s always the guy who should be held accountable. The underlying assumption could be women are too fragile, indecisive and lack the intellectual and moral capacity to understand and therefore be accountable for their actions. Reality of course is feminism is about women having power and control and men are always the enemy, it’s not about equality. Again, most women’s studies programs include works indicating that sex itself is an oppressive institution utilized by men to dominate and subjugate women.

Here’s an oped from a typical feminist professor in the US. Women should never be put in jail, accountability and consequences are for men:

washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2014/11/06/we-should-stop-putting-women-in-jail-for-anything/

Of course, there’s already a huge disparity in the punishments doled out for statutory rape between men and women violaters. Men go to jail, women get probation.
usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/09/22/rape-cdc-numbers-misleading-definition-date-forced-sexual-assault-column/16007089/

Again, I’m on board with gender equality. I have two daughters and I love them very much. I want them to have as much opportunity as possible, and receive the same rewards/renumeration as a male doing the same job. I’m happy both have had the opportunity to go to college and pursue the degree of their choice. But feminism, at least in the US, has become associated with folks advocating that all men are the enemy, all sex is rape, etc. etc. So, the point of the Times article is folks are rejecting a label. What does that label mean to them?

 

[PrayerShark]

Well, in the kooky world of feminism, a conservative women is similar to the happy slave in the 19th-century South. An unwitting tool of the oppressive patriarchy for which the path to freedom lies in taking feminist sacraments like contraception and abortion.

That’s an oxymoron.

 

[PrayerShark]

What does this mean?

That sexism and misogyny are still prevalent in society, ergo complete gender equality does not exist.

 

[PrayerShark]

styrgwillidar:

Again, the problem is that feminism long ago evolved from gender equality (equal pay, respect, opportunity- which to a great extent have been achieved in the US time.com/3222543/5-feminist-…ampaign=buffer exposingfeminism.wordpress.co…eminist-myths/) to male bashing and worse. Read the works in the curriculum of any women’s studies program at a major university and you’ll understand why many women are hesitating to identify as feminists.

I can’t really comment as I haven’t been to any women’s studies classes. I can guess though that most of the curriculum would be structured around diagnosing why gender equality exists in the first place. I’m reluctant to believe that men are portrayed as the enemy; less educated more likely.

styrgwillidar:

You’re in Australia, although I’ve visited it was only for a few days so I honestly don’t know the situation there. Although everyone was very friendly and hospitable.

I think there we are not too different to the US, but there are still problems of cultural and generational hostility towards women in power. We still have problems with domestic violence, objectification of young women, rape, etc., but probably no different from anywhere else in the western world.

styrgwillidar:

A few threads on here have explored a fairly simple concept- if two people drink together and then have sex shouldn’t both be held equally accountable for the situation? Modern third wave feminists say no, it’s always the guy who should be held accountable. The underlying assumption could be women are too fragile, indecisive and lack the intellectual and moral capacity to understand and therefore be accountable for their actions.

I guess my problem with this type of scenario is that it is on a religious forum where sex is not entirely seen as a positive thing. Perhaps you can link me to the thread so that I might comment on it there?

Reality of course is feminism is about women having power and control and men are always the enemy, it’s not about equality. Again, most women’s studies programs include works indicating that sex itself is an oppressive institution utilized by men to dominate and subjugate women.

See now I disagree with the bolded statement. I don’t think that has ever been the case, but more the reaction from those who fear the idea of women being in power.

styrgwillidar:

Here’s an oped from a typical feminist professor in the US. Women should never be put in jail, accountability and consequences are for men:

washingtonpost.com/postev…-for-anything/

Doesn’t this speak more to the tragedy of the US prison system? From what I read I don’t think she’s advocating the removal of justice entirely, but putting forward more viable solutions for perpatrators of petty crime; violent offenders (murder, sociopaths, etc.) would still be imprisoned. The same system would work for men as well, but given the smaller percentage of women in prison it would be a far more achievable proof of concept. The author is purposely being avant garde with her article for publicity and media attention. I guess we are left wondering what it says about men?

styrgwillidar:

Of course, there’s already a huge disparity in the punishments doled out for statutory rape between men and women violaters. Men go to jail, women get probation.
usatoday.com/story/opinio…lumn/16007089/

But isn’t that huge disparity weighted by the vastly larger number of men committing statutory rape?

styrgwillidar:

Again, I’m on board with gender equality. I have two daughters and I love them very much. I want them to have as much opportunity as possible, and receive the same rewards/renumeration as a male doing the same job. I’m happy both have had the opportunity to go to college and pursue the degree of their choice.

See this is the thing, you would therefore be a feminist given this is your stance would you not?

 

[MarcoPolo]

That sexism and misogyny are still prevalent in society

Assuming that “sexism and misogyny” are “prevalent,” that would mean if “sexism and misandry” were also prevalent, we should have a masculinism movement. According to the means by which you measured the prevalence of misogyny, can you tell us how misandry compares by that same measure?

 

[PrayerShark]

MarcoPolo:

Assuming that “sexism and misogyny” are “prevalent,” that would mean if “sexism and misandry” were also prevalent, we should have a masculinism movement. According to the means by which you measured the prevalence of misogyny, can you tell us how misandry compares by that same measure?

Here’s some statistics from the World Health Organisation (Domestic violence against women), do with them what you will. What my point was is that while this IS a statistic, feminism is certainly needed. Masculinism and ‘misandry’ always comes across as a childish, knee-jerk reaction by men who feel their identity under threat (for whatever reason). The fact that my dictionary fails to recognise both ‘masculinism’ and ‘misandry’ as words also speaks to their hollowness.

 

[styrgwillidar]

I can’t really comment as I haven’t been to any women’s studies classes. I can guess though that most of the curriculum would be structured around diagnosing why gender equality exists in the first place. I’m reluctant to believe that men are portrayed as the enemy; less educated more likely.

No, google for the radical feminist quotes, research the authors of the texts being used. Men are the enemy. Marriage is an institution which oppresses women and must be destroyed etc. etc etc.

I think there we are not too different to the US, but there are still problems of cultural and generational hostility towards women in power. We still have problems with domestic violence, objectification of young women, rape, etc., but probably no different from anywhere else in the western world.

I guess my problem with this type of scenario is that it is on a religious forum where sex is not entirely seen as a positive thing. Perhaps you can link me to the thread so that I might comment on it there?

See now I disagree with the bolded statement. I don’t think that has ever been the case, but more the reaction from those who fear the idea of women being in power.

Hence why a follow up article from Time and the reasons folks reject the label feminism, because I’m guessing that the vast majority would agree with the principle of equality of genders in terms of pay, respect and opportunity. What do the folks voting to reject the term believe it’s definition is? As represented by the radical feminist who state that any ‘heteronormative’ sex is a betrayal of women and willingly participating in the subjugation of females?

Doesn’t this speak more to the tragedy of the US prison system? From what I read I don’t think she’s advocating the removal of justice entirely, but putting forward more viable solutions for perpatrators of petty crime; violent offenders (murder, sociopaths, etc.) would still be imprisoned. The same system would work for men as well, but given the smaller percentage of women in prison it would be a far more achievable proof of concept. The author is purposely being avant garde with her article for publicity and media attention. I guess we are left wondering what it says about men?

But, she isn’t promoting the idea of prison reform for all sexes- as you note, this may be the right approach for men as well. Many of her arguments should apply to both sexes equally, but she’s only advocating for females.

But isn’t that huge disparity weighted by the vastly larger number of men committing statutory rape?
No, the percentages are the same. Similarly, the rates of domestic violence committed by women are roughly the same as for men. Not taken as seriously since the average woman has a harder time to serious damage to the average man. There is a reason we teach boys not to hit women, to control their temper, and walk away if they must from taunting/teasing/verbal abuse. We men on the whole have too much of a physical advantage.

See this is the thing, you would therefore be a feminist given this is your stance would you not?

Therein lies the problem, by the definition given by a first wave feminist-- equality of pay, opportunity, and respect- yes. As defined by women’s studies programs, radical feminists, etc. No. I do not accept the proposition that all sex is rape. I do not accept the proposition that all men are rapists. I do not accept the proposition that women are incapable of making rational decisions weighing risk/benefits and being accountable, I do not accept the proposition that marriage must be destroyed for women to attain true equality, I do not accept the proposition that saying hello and smiling politely to a women (or a man) is sexual assault, I do not accept the proposition that acts of chivalry (opening a door for someone) is an insult and attempt to oppress.

So, since the term is pretty loaded depending on whose definition you’re using- I hesitate to put the label on myself.

 

[Kurisu35712]

A few sources. For all I know, absolutely none of these could be true of Australia, but as far as the US goes, here you are:

time.com/3222543/5-feminist-myths-that-will-not-die/

thoughtcatalog.com/janet-bloomfield/2014/08/5-legal-rights-women-have-that-men-dont/

ncfm.org/2011/04/issues/criminal-sentencing/

people.terry.uga.edu/mustard/sentencing.pdf

nydailynews.com/news/crime/judged-bashes-probation-department-gender-bias-favor-leniency-girls-article-1.473763

I also found several posts on tumblr with links to sites and studies that display similar information, but I’m not entirely sure if the forum allows links to tumblr due to potential content? If anyone wants the links, feel free to PM me.

Personally, as a US citizen, I’m VERY reluctant to use the word feminism. I’m 21. Frankly, I don’t think the term is defined the same way as it was in the 1900’s even up to the 70’s and 80’s. The word, at least to my generation (in the US anyway) seems to have changed, and not in a good way. It no longer refers to the same movement that pushed for women’s suffrage and the elimination of discrimination based on gender in the workplace and in politics. Hence why I feel so many people have a somewhat negative reaction to its usage. It’s really become associated with the kinds of people who force NASA pilots to apologize on live television for wearing a shirt showing pinup models, or for suing a Catholic organization for failing to offer free condoms and contraception to female employees. In the US, egalitarianism is a far friendlier and more accurate word to describe the kind of feminism PrayerShark seems to be referring to.

 

[PrayerShark]

I suppose what concerns me is that we start accepting new meaning to movements based on the actions and opinions of a set of fringe lunatics.

To draw an analogy, it’s akin to the negative reaction the “Christian” name has because of associations with extremists, cults, hate groups (like the KKK) and some of the odd people on this board. Same with Islam, same with Judiasm.

I’m good friends with a number of strong women who consider themselves feminists but this definition:

As defined by women’s studies programs, radical feminists, etc. No. I do not accept the proposition that all sex is rape. I do not accept the proposition that all men are rapists. I do not accept the proposition that women are incapable of making rational decisions weighing risk/benefits and being accountable, I do not accept the proposition that marriage must be destroyed for women to attain true equality, I do not accept the proposition that saying hello and smiling politely to a women (or a man) is sexual assault, I do not accept the proposition that acts of chivalry (opening a door for someone) is an insult and attempt to oppress.

…is something they would not identify with. Surely this is a fringe argument?

 

[Kurisu35712]

I suppose what concerns me is that we start accepting new meaning to movements based on the actions and opinions of a set of fringe lunatics.

To draw an analogy, it’s akin to the negative reaction the “Christian” name has because of associations with extremists, cults, hate groups (like the KKK) and some of the odd people on this board. Same with Islam, same with Judiasm.

I’m good friends with a number of strong women who consider themselves feminists but this definition:

…is something they would not identify with. Surely this is a fringe argument?

I agree, it’s awful when the meaning of any group changes out of association with its vocal minority, but unfortunately, they’ve gotten so loud in the US, people here have stopped assigning the same meaning to feminism that it used to have, not to mention Christian. Part of it has to do with the fact that many “feminist” bloggers and journalists are actually more misandric than feminist. But they label themselves as “feminist” authors, and by this point there are so many of them, the entire movement has become tainted. Well… Not the movement, but the public’s perception of the movement.

A hypothetical feminist blogger who says that domestic abuse in the US is a serious problem, and points out that there should be more helplines etc. in place for abused men and women, and who argues that no business should tolerate sexual harassment tends to get much less attention than the “feminist” who claims that women can’t possibly abuse men, and that fathers should never get primary custody of their children. For reference, in the US the mother nearly always receives primary custody in the event of a divorce, even in cases where the father was a stay-at-home dad and the mother worked. Naturally, as with most groups, the quieter reasonable people are drowned out by the louder and more militant. This has been going on for so long here, that by this point, it’s more effective for an actual feminist to distance him/herself from the label in order to get their points across.

 

[Estevao]

Feminism is communism in that it wants to destroy the family and replace it with the totalitarian state.

 

[styrgwillidar]

I suppose what concerns me is that we start accepting new meaning to movements based on the actions and opinions of a set of fringe lunatics.

To draw an analogy, it’s akin to the negative reaction the “Christian” name has because of associations with extremists, cults, hate groups (like the KKK) and some of the odd people on this board. Same with Islam, same with Judiasm.

I’m good friends with a number of strong women who consider themselves feminists but this definition:

…is something they would not identify with. Surely this is a fringe argument?

Well, fringe in terms of the general population. But the problem in any movement is the nutcases making the most noise tend to get all the attention. They make better press/media, and they do control the universities, well at least the women’s studies programs. The most ‘influential’ writers in the feminist movement tend to hold, well at least they write and put forward, those positions. Do they sincerely believe them or is it one of those to get published and attention you have to push the boundaries kind of thing? Anyway, they do tend to get a lot of media coverage, they’re the ones with the credentials in women’s studies, women’s issues. They’re faction are the ones showing up and protesting anything they deem offensive, and feminism in the US is coming to be more and more associated with them.

They make the most eye-catching headlines with their radical positions,
and you would certainly have a point in insisting they don’t represent true ‘feminism’. But since the loudest get the most attention, are they redefining the term? Is that why the Times poll participants voted the way the did?

I don’t know. It could be kind of like folks seeing the avowedly Christian group that was protesting at the funerals of US soldiers claiming it was divine retribution for tolerance of homosexuality. Then pointing at their position as how to define Christianity.

 

[MarcoPolo]

Masculinism and ‘misandry’ always comes across as a childish, knee-jerk reaction by men who feel their identity under threat (for whatever reason).

I am aware of the statistics, and believe such misogyny exists—but as a the uniquely discriminated against group as it is marketed is a different question. I don’t agree that women are discriminated against but not men. And what you just said above certainly sounds like it ignores statistics and is an example of misandry itself.