Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with objectification being interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is misogynist and degrading towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be [[BrokenBase very divisive]], especially in TheNewTens; some will see any inclusion of such a character as sexist by default, regardless of whether she has characterization beyond simply being eye candy, while others will challenge any criticism towards them even if said criticisms are valid.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with objectification being interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is misogynist and degrading towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be [[BrokenBase very divisive]], especially in TheNewTens; some will see any the mere inclusion of such a character as sexist by default, regardless of whether she has default while dismissing any characterization she has beyond simply being eye candy, while others will challenge any defend their inclusion within the work even if the criticism towards them even if said criticisms are is valid.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with objectification being interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is misogynist and degrading towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be [[BrokenBase very divisive]], especially in TheNewTens; some will see any inclusion of such a character as sexist by default, regardless of whether she has characterization beyond simply being eye candy, while others will challenge any criticism towards them even if sai.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with objectification being interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is misogynist and degrading towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be [[BrokenBase very divisive]], especially in TheNewTens; some will see any inclusion of such a character as sexist by default, regardless of whether she has characterization beyond simply being eye candy, while others will challenge any criticism towards them even if sai.said criticisms are valid.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
How's this?
Changed line(s) 80,83 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with objectification being interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be very divisive.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the logic of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by a creator's base assumptions.
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the logic of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by a creator's base assumptions.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with objectification being interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist misogynist and degrading towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be [[BrokenBase very divisive.divisive]], especially in TheNewTens; some will see any inclusion of such a character as sexist by default, regardless of whether she has characterization beyond simply being eye candy, while others will challenge any criticism towards them even if sai.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Feminists Some feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the logic of it being "her choice".choice", particularly if it comes across as a HandWave that makes no sense within the context of the work in question (such as an ActionGirl wearing a {{Stripperific}} outfit without any valid justification, while the rest of TheTeam wear more practical ones), rather than show how their sexualization is truly in-character (such as the character being TheTease or a ShamelessFanserviceGirl). Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel respond that they are [[IJustWriteTheThing simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; own]]; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by a creator's base assumptions.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 82,83 (click to see context) from:
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the logic of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by creator's base assumptions.
to:
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the logic of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by a creator's base assumptions.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 82,83 (click to see context) from:
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the justification of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by creator's base assumptions.
to:
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the justification logic of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by creator's base assumptions.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Also, I think this works as a brief addition.
Added DiffLines:
Feminists also challenge the justification of fictional women being sexualized under the justification of it being "her choice". Obviously, fictional characters cannot "choose" -- the creator does. Some creators feel that they are simply telling their characters' stories while the characters themselves act on their own; however, the counter-argument is that no story is made in a vacuum and that everything in a work is formed by creator's base assumptions.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
This probably sounds clearer.
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with the meaning of the latter term being mistakenly interpreted as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be very divisive.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with the meaning of the latter term objectification being mistakenly interpreted in bad faith arguments as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be very divisive.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze; however, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with the latter term being taken to mean "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation"[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze; however, MaleGaze. However, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not necessarily going hand-in-hand, with the meaning of the latter term being taken to mean mistakenly interpreted as "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist towards women in and of itself, regardless of presentation"[[/note]] presentation." This is why many attempts to make a series HotterAndSexier or TamerAndChaster in regards to MsFanservice characters tend to be very divisive.[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification (in the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze, not in the sense of the presence of sexy women in media being sexist ''in itself''). In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification (in objectification. [[note]] In the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of the MaleGaze, MaleGaze; however, objectification and sexualization too often tend to be conflated with one another despite not in necessarily going hand-in-hand, with the sense of the presence of sexy latter term being taken to mean "Any fanservice aimed at heterosexual men is sexist towards women in media being sexist ''in itself''). and of itself, regardless of presentation"[[/note]] In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Edited so it reads better and I got a more recent statistic about murder rates.
Changed line(s) 151,152 (click to see context) from:
It should also be pointed out that gender relations are a closed circle. Consider the quote by the author Creator/MargaretAtwood, when a male friend of hers answered in response to a question about why men feel threatened by women "They are afraid women will laugh at them." to which she responded, "We're afraid of being killed." The quote is often simplified to “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.” [[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/188039-men-are-afraid-that-women-will-laugh-at-them-women]] [[https://www.pbs.org/kued/nosafeplace/articles/nightmare.html#:~:text=Novelist%20Margaret%20Atwood%20writes%20that,re%20afraid%20of%20being%20killed.%22]]" This is not an exaggeration; [[https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/report/2014/06/18/91998/women-under-the-gun/ a third of murdered women are killed by an "intimate partner"]], and that's even before we factor in rape-and-murder crimes inflicted on strangers. What men do affects women, and since feminism is concerned with the fates of women, it is concerned at least by association with the fates of men.
to:
It should also be pointed out that gender relations are a closed circle. Consider the quote by the author Creator/MargaretAtwood, when a male friend of hers answered in response to a question about why men feel threatened by women "They are afraid women will laugh at them." to which she responded, "We're afraid of being killed." The quote is often simplified to “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.” [[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/188039-men-are-afraid-that-women-will-laugh-at-them-women]] [[https://www.pbs.org/kued/nosafeplace/articles/nightmare.html#:~:text=Novelist%20Margaret%20Atwood%20writes%20that,re%20afraid%20of%20being%20killed.%22]]" This %22 when a male friend of hers answered in response to a question about why men feel threatened by women "They are afraid women will laugh at them." to which she responded, "We're afraid of being killed."]]" The quote is often simplified to [[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/188039-men-are-afraid-that-women-will-laugh-at-them-women “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.”]] Regardless, this is not an exaggeration; [[https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/report/2014/06/18/91998/women-under-the-gun/ a third of murdered women are killed by an "intimate partner"]], partner"]] and [[https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-51572665 61% of women murdered in the UK in 2018 were murdered by their current or ex-partner.]], and that's even before we factor in rape-and-murder crimes inflicted on strangers. What men do affects women, and since feminism is concerned with the fates of women, it is concerned at least by association with the fates of men.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
I found the original quote and the misquote. I see it's an over simplification here and I saw on the wikiquote page about Margret Atwood that it also might be quoting someone else. Please correct me if I'm wrong or if something about the page is wrong.
Changed line(s) 149,152 (click to see context) from:
The key to understanding this conflict is the fact that feminists (typically) ''do not object'' to people who focus on male gender problems, as long as they view themselves as complementary to feminism rather than antagonistic to it. Indeed, some feminists also align themselves with masculism (although they may not don that label) and do actively discuss men's issues, both independently and in relation to women's issues. As the feminist writer Laurie Penny has said, "men and boys are discouraged from talking about their pain. Thinking in a new way about sex, gender and power - call it feminism or 'masculism' or whatever the hell you like as long as you do it - can help men to process that pain."
It should also be pointed out that gender relations are a closed circle. Consider the quote typically ascribed (though currently without trustworthy citation) to the author Creator/MargaretAtwood: "[[http://www.wisdomquotes.com/quote/margaret-atwood-3.html Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.]]" This is not an exaggeration; [[https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/report/2014/06/18/91998/women-under-the-gun/ a third of murdered women are killed by an "intimate partner"]], and that's even before we factor in rape-and-murder crimes inflicted on strangers. What men do affects women, and since feminism is concerned with the fates of women, it is concerned at least by association with the fates of men.
It should also be pointed out that gender relations are a closed circle. Consider the quote typically ascribed (though currently without trustworthy citation) to the author Creator/MargaretAtwood: "[[http://www.wisdomquotes.com/quote/margaret-atwood-3.html Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.]]" This is not an exaggeration; [[https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/report/2014/06/18/91998/women-under-the-gun/ a third of murdered women are killed by an "intimate partner"]], and that's even before we factor in rape-and-murder crimes inflicted on strangers. What men do affects women, and since feminism is concerned with the fates of women, it is concerned at least by association with the fates of men.
to:
The key to understanding this conflict is the fact that feminists (typically) ''do not object'' to people who focus on male gender problems, as long as they view themselves as complementary to feminism rather than antagonistic to it. Indeed, some feminists also align themselves with masculism (although they may not don that label) and do actively discuss men's issues, both independently and in relation to women's issues. As the feminist writer writer, Laurie Penny has said, "men and boys are discouraged from talking about their pain. Thinking in a new way about sex, gender and power - call it feminism or 'masculism' or whatever the hell you like as long as you do it - can help men to process that pain."
It should also be pointed out that gender relations are a closed circle. Consider the quotetypically ascribed (though currently without trustworthy citation) to by the author Creator/MargaretAtwood: "[[http://www.wisdomquotes.com/quote/margaret-atwood-3.html Men Creator/MargaretAtwood, when a male friend of hers answered in response to a question about why men feel threatened by women "They are afraid women will laugh at them." to which she responded, "We're afraid of being killed." The quote is often simplified to “Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.]]" ” [[https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/188039-men-are-afraid-that-women-will-laugh-at-them-women]] [[https://www.pbs.org/kued/nosafeplace/articles/nightmare.html#:~:text=Novelist%20Margaret%20Atwood%20writes%20that,re%20afraid%20of%20being%20killed.%22]]" This is not an exaggeration; [[https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/report/2014/06/18/91998/women-under-the-gun/ a third of murdered women are killed by an "intimate partner"]], and that's even before we factor in rape-and-murder crimes inflicted on strangers. What men do affects women, and since feminism is concerned with the fates of women, it is concerned at least by association with the fates of men.
It should also be pointed out that gender relations are a closed circle. Consider the quote
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Given that J.K. Rowling herself is infamous for statements that have had her ostracized by the community as a TERF herself, her views of the label are immaterial. It would be like adding a passage stating that a member of the KKK didn't like the term "racist".
Changed line(s) 41 (click to see context) from:
* ''Radical feminism'': A term encompassing the more militant forms of feminism and also the most misunderstood. Conflating the more activist forms of radical feminism with fanatical "abolish men" and quasi-religious '[[SexIsEvil anti-sex]]' movements has resulted in this being the source of many of the [[StrawFeminist negative stereotypes]] surrounding feminism as a whole. Radical feminist movements see the problems women face as resulting from patriarchy (social power relations being slanted to favor males over females) and most of them see all other social struggles as a facet of or as a subordinate of it (where as most other feminists tend to see the patriarchy as a component of a larger system of inequality); and thus, equality can only be achieved via the complete dismantling of the patriarchy and its attendant gender-constructs. Most radical feminists oppose pornography, which they see as inherently oppressive towards women, and other forms of sex work such as prostitution, with most radical feminists today supporting the ‘Scandinavian model’ of criminalizing the buyer of sex but not the seller. While once very popular, the anti-pornography movement has gotten a lot of flak in recent years for being [[TheHorseshoeEffect not so different to the opposite side of the political spectrum]] in their view towards porn and sex, while that is not the point of many of its campaigners. Other radical feminists have been caught seemingly ignoring issues of class, race, and sexual orientation. Other still have expressed opinions viewed as transphobic (anti-{{transgender}}), viewing MTF (male to female) trans people as appropriating their oppression (or simply using their transition as an excuse to invade women-only spaces) and FTM (female to male) trans people as 'switching sides' to become the oppressors. Another anti-transgender argument commonly used by radical feminists is that, according to them, all transgender practices stem from gender stereotypes, and, since radical feminism aims to eradicate those stereotypes, transgender practices are inherently harmful to their goals. The terms TERF or TWERF[[note]]Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist/Trans Woman Exclusive Radical Feminist[[/note]] are often used to distinguish the latter from other radical feminists. However, many of those feminists, including author J.K. Rowling, see those terms as dehumanizing slurs and prefer the term "Gender-Critical Feminist".
to:
* ''Radical feminism'': A term encompassing the more militant forms of feminism and also the most misunderstood. Conflating the more activist forms of radical feminism with fanatical "abolish men" and quasi-religious '[[SexIsEvil anti-sex]]' movements has resulted in this being the source of many of the [[StrawFeminist negative stereotypes]] surrounding feminism as a whole. Radical feminist movements see the problems women face as resulting from patriarchy (social power relations being slanted to favor males over females) and most of them see all other social struggles as a facet of or as a subordinate of it (where as most other feminists tend to see the patriarchy as a component of a larger system of inequality); and thus, equality can only be achieved via the complete dismantling of the patriarchy and its attendant gender-constructs. Most radical feminists oppose pornography, which they see as inherently oppressive towards women, and other forms of sex work such as prostitution, with most radical feminists today supporting the ‘Scandinavian model’ of criminalizing the buyer of sex but not the seller. While once very popular, the anti-pornography movement has gotten a lot of flak in recent years for being [[TheHorseshoeEffect not so different to the opposite side of the political spectrum]] in their view towards porn and sex, while that is not the point of many of its campaigners. Other radical feminists have been caught seemingly ignoring issues of class, race, and sexual orientation. Other still have expressed opinions viewed as transphobic (anti-{{transgender}}), viewing MTF (male to female) trans people as appropriating their oppression (or simply using their transition as an excuse to invade women-only spaces) and FTM (female to male) trans people as 'switching sides' to become the oppressors. Another anti-transgender argument commonly used by radical feminists is that, according to them, all transgender practices stem from gender stereotypes, and, since radical feminism aims to eradicate those stereotypes, transgender practices are inherently harmful to their goals. The terms TERF or TWERF[[note]]Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist/Trans Woman Exclusive Radical Feminist[[/note]] are often used to distinguish the latter from other radical feminists. However, many of those feminists, including author J.K. Rowling, see those terms as dehumanizing slurs and prefer the term "Gender-Critical Feminist".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 41 (click to see context) from:
* ''Radical feminism'': A term encompassing the more militant forms of feminism and also the most misunderstood. Conflating the more activist forms of radical feminism with fanatical "abolish men" and quasi-religious '[[SexIsEvil anti-sex]]' movements has resulted in this being the source of many of the [[StrawFeminist negative stereotypes]] surrounding feminism as a whole. Radical feminist movements see the problems women face as resulting from patriarchy (social power relations being slanted to favor males over females) and most of them see all other social struggles as a facet of or as a subordinate of it (where as most other feminists tend to see the patriarchy as a component of a larger system of inequality); and thus, equality can only be achieved via the complete dismantling of the patriarchy and its attendant gender-constructs. Most radical feminists oppose pornography, which they see as inherently oppressive towards women, and other forms of sex work such as prostitution, with most radical feminists today supporting the ‘Scandinavian model’ of criminalizing the buyer of sex but not the seller. While once very popular, the anti-pornography movement has gotten a lot of flak in recent years for being [[TheHorseshoeEffect not so different to the opposite side of the political spectrum]] in their view towards porn and sex, while that is not the point of many of its campaigners. Other radical feminists have been caught seemingly ignoring issues of class, race, and sexual orientation. Other still have expressed opinions viewed as transphobic (anti-{{transgender}}), viewing MTF (male to female) trans people as appropriating their oppression (or simply using their transition as an excuse to invade women-only spaces) and FTM (female to male) trans people as 'switching sides' to become the oppressors. Another anti-transgender argument commonly used by radical feminists is that, according to them, all transgender practices stem from gender stereotypes, and, since radical feminism aims to eradicate those stereotypes, transgender practices are inherently harmful to their goals. The terms TERF or TWERF[[note]]Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist/Trans Woman Exclusive Radical Feminist[[/note]] are often used to distinguish the latter from other radical feminists.
to:
* ''Radical feminism'': A term encompassing the more militant forms of feminism and also the most misunderstood. Conflating the more activist forms of radical feminism with fanatical "abolish men" and quasi-religious '[[SexIsEvil anti-sex]]' movements has resulted in this being the source of many of the [[StrawFeminist negative stereotypes]] surrounding feminism as a whole. Radical feminist movements see the problems women face as resulting from patriarchy (social power relations being slanted to favor males over females) and most of them see all other social struggles as a facet of or as a subordinate of it (where as most other feminists tend to see the patriarchy as a component of a larger system of inequality); and thus, equality can only be achieved via the complete dismantling of the patriarchy and its attendant gender-constructs. Most radical feminists oppose pornography, which they see as inherently oppressive towards women, and other forms of sex work such as prostitution, with most radical feminists today supporting the ‘Scandinavian model’ of criminalizing the buyer of sex but not the seller. While once very popular, the anti-pornography movement has gotten a lot of flak in recent years for being [[TheHorseshoeEffect not so different to the opposite side of the political spectrum]] in their view towards porn and sex, while that is not the point of many of its campaigners. Other radical feminists have been caught seemingly ignoring issues of class, race, and sexual orientation. Other still have expressed opinions viewed as transphobic (anti-{{transgender}}), viewing MTF (male to female) trans people as appropriating their oppression (or simply using their transition as an excuse to invade women-only spaces) and FTM (female to male) trans people as 'switching sides' to become the oppressors. Another anti-transgender argument commonly used by radical feminists is that, according to them, all transgender practices stem from gender stereotypes, and, since radical feminism aims to eradicate those stereotypes, transgender practices are inherently harmful to their goals. The terms TERF or TWERF[[note]]Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist/Trans Woman Exclusive Radical Feminist[[/note]] are often used to distinguish the latter from other radical feminists. However, many of those feminists, including author J.K. Rowling, see those terms as dehumanizing slurs and prefer the term "Gender-Critical Feminist".
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 181 (click to see context) from:
* '''Privilege:''' The advantages (relative to disadvantages) one has when navigating through life. All the things about you that might make your life a little easier than the lives of other people in your social group. Examples include: protection from racism, protection from sexism, protection from religious discrimination, protection from homophobia, protection from classism, etc. When somebody tells you to "check your privilege", they're reminding you to recognize where you're coming from. For example, the popular feminist perception is that if you're straight and white, your experience differs from that of queer women of color; for instance, you can walk down street and kiss the person you love ''and'' not get yelled at to go back to your home country. The hardest part of this to understand is that privilege is context-sensitive; just because you enjoy certain advantages in one context, that doesn't mean you're not disadvantaged in others (an example is the treatment of Caucasians in South Africa). People who haven't figured this out -- which can range from disenfranchised blue-collar workers in rural America to non-white feminist women -- often use their contextual disadvantages to claim global disadvantages, or ignore the legitimate suffering of certain people because those people are privileged in other ways. A poor, hard-working white man might be offended at being called privileged because he has to put up with all kinds of crap all the time, missing the point that there's still more kinds of crap he doesn't even have to know about because he's not black or a woman -- and that the same theory would also, at the same time, acknowledge his lack of privilege compared to someone who's wealthy and doesn't have to work so hard.
to:
* '''Privilege:''' The advantages (relative to disadvantages) one has when navigating through life. All the things about you that might make your life a little easier than the lives of other people in your social group. Examples include: protection from racism, protection from sexism, protection from religious discrimination, protection from homophobia, protection from classism, etc. When somebody tells you to "check your privilege", they're reminding you to recognize where you're coming from. For example, the popular feminist perception is that if you're straight and white, your experience differs from that of queer women of color; for instance, you can walk down street and kiss the person you love without getting yelled at, ''and'' not get yelled at to go back to your home country. The hardest part of this to understand is that privilege is context-sensitive; just because you enjoy certain advantages in one context, that doesn't mean you're not disadvantaged in others (an example is the treatment of Caucasians in South Africa). People who haven't figured this out -- which can range from disenfranchised blue-collar workers in rural America to non-white feminist women -- often use their contextual disadvantages to claim global disadvantages, or ignore the legitimate suffering of certain people because those people are privileged in other ways. A poor, hard-working white man might be offended at being called privileged because "privileged" because, as opposed to someone who's IdleRich, he has to put up with all kinds of crap all the time, -- while missing the point that there's still more kinds of crap he doesn't even have to know about ''know about'' because he's not black or a woman -- woman. BothSidesHaveAPoint, and the fact that the same theory would also, at the same time, acknowledge his lack of privilege compared is so deeply contextual -- and, more importantly, that aforementioned context is often overlooked -- can make it ''very'' difficult to someone who's wealthy and doesn't have to work so hard.discuss.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 80,81 (click to see context) from:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification, with CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of MaleGaze. In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
to:
There's more of a consensus on fanservice: feminists generally claim not to be against seeing sexy ladies in media, but don't like how often this leads to objectification, with objectification (in the sense of CharacterDevelopment deferred in favor of MaleGaze.the MaleGaze, not in the sense of the presence of sexy women in media being sexist ''in itself''). In any case, most feminists enjoy sex just fine, and [[{{Asexuality}} those who don't]] are typically at least okay with the idea of it. There's even a whole faction of the movement, called Sex-Positive Feminism, that focuses on working to promote positive and empowering views of sexuality, and feminists who work in the sex industry who consider the work that they do to be empowering and advocate for feminism and the world at large to be more open-minded about sex work.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 161,164 (click to see context) from:
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a general attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: The flip-side of Cancel Culture. Where the accuser is likely to recieve death threats, ostracation and a life-long reputation as a liar, even if they are 100% telling the truth).
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/23/tara-reade-biden-202785 while it has rightly come under fire recently for its middling acceptance of Tara Reade's accusations]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/23/tara-reade-biden-202785 while it has rightly come under fire recently for its middling acceptance of Tara Reade's accusations]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
to:
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a general attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: The flip-side of Cancel Culture. Where the accuser is likely to recieve receive death threats, ostracation ostracization and a life-long reputation as a liar, even if they are 100% telling the truth).
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/23/tara-reade-biden-202785 while it has rightly come under fire recently for its middling acceptance of Tara Reade's accusations]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
truth).
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/23/tara-reade-biden-202785 while it has rightly come under fire recently for its middling acceptance of Tara Reade's accusations]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Removing the references to the Heard/Depp situation. Based on topics
I've been following around here, the situation with that is so contentious, that the wiki should avoid taking a definitive stance altogether. Likewise, from what I can find on Michael Jackson's allegations, that is likewise a mess. The Tara Reade situation seems like a legitimate issue to address, but not in the way it's presented; from the beginning, the #Me Too movement has had differing opinions on how it's been handled. Presenting it as if #Me Too rejected her wholesale seems inaccurate.
I've been following around here, the situation with that is so contentious, that the wiki should avoid taking a definitive stance altogether. Likewise, from what I can find on Michael Jackson's allegations, that is likewise a mess. The Tara Reade situation seems like a legitimate issue to address, but not in the way it's presented; from the beginning, the #Me Too movement has had differing opinions on how it's been handled. Presenting it as if #Me Too rejected her wholesale seems inaccurate.Changed line(s) 159,164 (click to see context) from:
Legitimate concerns around "Cancel Culture" are based around people either becoming social pariahs [[DisproportionateRetribution based on a mistake they have long since changed from]] or from a mere [[WitchHunt accusation]]. The UrExample of this is likely Michael Jackson, who is still to this day {{Misblamed}} as a pedophile even after his death, despite being proven completely innocent. For a modern case, Cancel Culture harrased alleged DomesticAbuser Johnny Depp for months until it was proven that HE was in-fact the victim of abuse by his wife (and even then, [[NeverMyFault some continue to declare him the guilty party even to this day]].)
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: The flip-side of Cancel Culture. Where the accuser is likely to recieve death threats, ostracation and a life-long reputation as a liar, even if they are 100% telling the truth)
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/metoo-is-on-the-democratic-foot-what-does-that-mean-for-november/2020/04/28/87734be8-8997-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html while it has rightly come under fire recently for silencing Tara Reade speaking out]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: The flip-side of Cancel Culture. Where the accuser is likely to recieve death threats, ostracation and a life-long reputation as a liar, even if they are 100% telling the truth)
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/metoo-is-on-the-democratic-foot-what-does-that-mean-for-november/2020/04/28/87734be8-8997-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html while it has rightly come under fire recently for silencing Tara Reade speaking out]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
to:
Legitimate concerns around "Cancel Culture" are based around people either becoming social pariahs [[DisproportionateRetribution based on a mistake they have long since changed from]] or from a mere [[WitchHunt accusation]]. The UrExample of this is likely Michael Jackson, who is still to this day {{Misblamed}} as a pedophile even after his death, despite being proven completely innocent. For a modern case, Cancel Culture harrased alleged DomesticAbuser Johnny Depp for months until it was proven that HE was in-fact the victim of abuse by his wife (and even then, [[NeverMyFault some continue to declare him the guilty party even to this day]].)
accusation]].
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to amore general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: The flip-side of Cancel Culture. Where the accuser is likely to recieve death threats, ostracation and a life-long reputation as a liar, even if they are 100% telling the truth)
truth).
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/metoo-is-on-the-democratic-foot-what-does-that-mean-for-november/2020/04/28/87734be8-8997-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html politico.com/news/2020/04/23/tara-reade-biden-202785 while it has rightly come under fire recently for silencing its middling acceptance of Tara Reade speaking out]], Reade's accusations]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who try to abuse it, it would be a huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that this means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 159,162 (click to see context) from:
Legitimate concerns around "Cancel Culture" are based around people either becoming social pariahs [[DispraportionateRetribution based on a mistake they have long since changed from]] or from a mere [[WitchHunt accusation]]. The UrExample of this is likely Michael Jackson who is still to this day MisBlaimed as a pedophile even after his death despite being proven completely innocent. For a modern case. Cancel Culture harrased alleged DomesticAbuser Johnny Depp for months until it was proven that HE was in-fact the victim of abuse by his wife (and even then, [[NeverMyFault some continue to declare him the guilty party even to this day]].
But. This is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: in an allegation, the accused AND accuser are both likely to recieve online harrasment, death threats and a life long reputation as a "predator" or "liar" no matter who is telling the truth.
But. This is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: in an allegation, the accused AND accuser are both likely to recieve online harrasment, death threats and a life long reputation as a "predator" or "liar" no matter who is telling the truth.
to:
Legitimate concerns around "Cancel Culture" are based around people either becoming social pariahs [[DispraportionateRetribution [[DisproportionateRetribution based on a mistake they have long since changed from]] or from a mere [[WitchHunt accusation]]. The UrExample of this is likely Michael Jackson Jackson, who is still to this day MisBlaimed {{Misblamed}} as a pedophile even after his death death, despite being proven completely innocent. For a modern case. case, Cancel Culture harrased alleged DomesticAbuser Johnny Depp for months until it was proven that HE was in-fact the victim of abuse by his wife (and even then, [[NeverMyFault some continue to declare him the guilty party even to this day]].
day]].)
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE:in an allegation, The flip-side of Cancel Culture. Where the accused AND accuser are both is likely to recieve online harrasment, death threats threats, ostracation and a life long life-long reputation as a "predator" or "liar" no matter who is liar, even if they are 100% telling the truth.
truth)
But. This issue is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE:
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Expanding on the Cancel Culture section since the original write up was quite the strawman.
Changed line(s) 157,160 (click to see context) from:
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people who commit a RoleEndingMisdemeanor? And the [=#MeToo=] hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. And, obviously, we can have discussions about overzealousness, and the level of misdemeanor that warrants reprisal. But if you're going to declare that bad people being punished for being bad is proof of some sort of ethical failure... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. And, obviously, we can have discussions about overzealousness, and the level of misdemeanor that warrants reprisal. But if you're going to declare that bad people being punished for being bad is proof of some sort of ethical failure... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
to:
First of all, that's two seperate discussions.
Legitimate concerns around "Cancelculture," as in, the Culture" are based around people either becoming social backlash pariahs [[DispraportionateRetribution based on a mistake they have long since changed from]] or from a mere [[WitchHunt accusation]]. The UrExample of this is likely Michael Jackson who is still to this day MisBlaimed as a pedophile even after his death despite being proven completely innocent. For a modern case. Cancel Culture harrased alleged DomesticAbuser Johnny Depp for months until it was proven that HE was in-fact the victim of abuse by his wife (and even then, [[NeverMyFault some continue to declare him the guilty party even to this day]].
But. This is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism anddeplatforming goes back to a more general "Guilty until Proven Innocent" attitude that has also negatively impacted WOMEN throughout history, even today (IE: in an allegation, the accused AND accuser are both likely to recieve online harrasment, death threats and a life long reputation as a "predator" or "liar" no matter who is telling the truth.
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/metoo-is-on-the-democratic-foot-what-does-that-mean-for-november/2020/04/28/87734be8-8997-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html while it has rightly come under fire recently for silencing Tara Reade speaking out]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people whocommit try to abuse it, it would be a RoleEndingMisdemeanor? And the [=#MeToo=] hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof huge [[LogicalFallacy leap in logic]] to say that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminismthis means the entire concept of speaking out is a bad thing. If you want a case of the #MeToo movement having an ''effect'' on the world. And, obviously, we can have discussions about overzealousness, and the level of misdemeanor that warrants reprisal. But if you're going to declare that bad people being punished for being bad is proof of some sort of ethical failure... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
absolutely positive effect: [[https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/11/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-sentencing.html Look no further...]]
Legitimate concerns around "Cancel
But. This is not exclusive to, nor even rooted in feminism and
As for the #MeToo movement, [[https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/metoo-is-on-the-democratic-foot-what-does-that-mean-for-november/2020/04/28/87734be8-8997-11ea-9dfd-990f9dcc71fc_story.html while it has rightly come under fire recently for silencing Tara Reade speaking out]], and, like any public movement, there WILL be of course, people who
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 155,160 (click to see context) from:
!!! But hold on. Isn't the rise of "Cancel Culture" and the "#MeToo" movement proof that feminism has gone too far?
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people who air offensive attitudes? And the #MeToo hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. But if you're going to declare that rapists ''being held accountable for breaking the law'' is bad... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people who air offensive attitudes? And the #MeToo hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. But if you're going to declare that rapists ''being held accountable for breaking the law'' is bad... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
to:
!!! But hold on. Isn't the rise of "Cancel Culture" and the "#MeToo" "[=#MeToo=]" movement proof that feminism has gone too far?
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people whoair offensive attitudes? commit a RoleEndingMisdemeanor? And the #MeToo [=#MeToo=] hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. And, obviously, we can have discussions about overzealousness, and the level of misdemeanor that warrants reprisal. But if you're going to declare thatrapists ''being held accountable bad people being punished for breaking the law'' being bad is bad...proof of some sort of ethical failure... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people who
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. And, obviously, we can have discussions about overzealousness, and the level of misdemeanor that warrants reprisal. But if you're going to declare that
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 153,154 (click to see context) from:
Feminists generally ''are'' opposed to men’s rights activists who believe that feminism has gone too far.
to:
Feminists generally ''are'' opposed to men’s men's rights activists who believe that feminism has gone too far.
far.
!!! But hold on. Isn't the rise of "Cancel Culture" and the "#MeToo" movement proof that feminism has gone too far?
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people who air offensive attitudes? And the #MeToo hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. But if you're going to declare that rapists ''being held accountable for breaking the law'' is bad... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
!!! But hold on. Isn't the rise of "Cancel Culture" and the "#MeToo" movement proof that feminism has gone too far?
"Cancel culture," as in, the social backlash and deplatforming of people who air offensive attitudes? And the #MeToo hashtag about exposing people who have performed sexual assault? Are these proof that feminism has gone too far?
[[BigNo No]]. They are proof that feminism is having an ''effect'' on the world. But if you're going to declare that rapists ''being held accountable for breaking the law'' is bad... well, [[MoralMyopia you do you]].
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 41 (click to see context) from:
* ''Radical feminism'': A term encompassing the more militant forms of feminism and also the most misunderstood. Conflating the more activist forms of radical feminism with fanatical "abolish men" and quasi-religious 'anti-sex' movements has resulted in this being the source of many of the [[StrawFeminist negative stereotypes]] surrounding feminism as a whole. Radical feminist movements see the problems women face as resulting from patriarchy (social power relations being slanted to favor males over females) and most of them see all other social struggles as a facet of or as a subordinate of it (where as most other feminists tend to see the patriarchy as a component of a larger system of inequality); and thus, equality can only be achieved via the complete dismantling of the patriarchy and its attendant gender-constructs. Most radical feminists oppose pornography, which they see as inherently oppressive towards women, and other forms of sex work such as prostitution, with most radical feminists today supporting the ‘Scandinavian model’ of criminalizing the buyer of sex but not the seller. While once very popular, the anti-pornography movement [[SexIsEvil has gotten a lot of flak in recent years for being ‘anti-sex’]], while that is not the point of many of its campaigners. Other radical feminists have been caught seemingly ignoring issues of class, race, and sexual orientation. Other still have expressed opinions viewed as transphobic (anti-{{transgender}}), viewing MTF (male to female) trans people as appropriating their oppression (or simply using their transition as an excuse to invade women-only spaces) and FTM (female to male) trans people as 'switching sides' to become the oppressors. Another anti-transgender argument commonly used by radical feminists is that, according to them, all transgender practices stem from gender stereotypes, and, since radical feminism aims to eradicate those stereotypes, transgender practices are inherently harmful to their goals. The terms TERF or TWERF[[note]]Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist/Trans Woman Exclusive Radical Feminist[[/note]] are often used to distinguish the latter from other radical feminists.
to:
* ''Radical feminism'': A term encompassing the more militant forms of feminism and also the most misunderstood. Conflating the more activist forms of radical feminism with fanatical "abolish men" and quasi-religious 'anti-sex' '[[SexIsEvil anti-sex]]' movements has resulted in this being the source of many of the [[StrawFeminist negative stereotypes]] surrounding feminism as a whole. Radical feminist movements see the problems women face as resulting from patriarchy (social power relations being slanted to favor males over females) and most of them see all other social struggles as a facet of or as a subordinate of it (where as most other feminists tend to see the patriarchy as a component of a larger system of inequality); and thus, equality can only be achieved via the complete dismantling of the patriarchy and its attendant gender-constructs. Most radical feminists oppose pornography, which they see as inherently oppressive towards women, and other forms of sex work such as prostitution, with most radical feminists today supporting the ‘Scandinavian model’ of criminalizing the buyer of sex but not the seller. While once very popular, the anti-pornography movement [[SexIsEvil has gotten a lot of flak in recent years for being ‘anti-sex’]], [[TheHorseshoeEffect not so different to the opposite side of the political spectrum]] in their view towards porn and sex, while that is not the point of many of its campaigners. Other radical feminists have been caught seemingly ignoring issues of class, race, and sexual orientation. Other still have expressed opinions viewed as transphobic (anti-{{transgender}}), viewing MTF (male to female) trans people as appropriating their oppression (or simply using their transition as an excuse to invade women-only spaces) and FTM (female to male) trans people as 'switching sides' to become the oppressors. Another anti-transgender argument commonly used by radical feminists is that, according to them, all transgender practices stem from gender stereotypes, and, since radical feminism aims to eradicate those stereotypes, transgender practices are inherently harmful to their goals. The terms TERF or TWERF[[note]]Trans-Exclusive Radical Feminist/Trans Woman Exclusive Radical Feminist[[/note]] are often used to distinguish the latter from other radical feminists.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Not an answer.
Changed line(s) 63,64 (click to see context) from:
The movement first gained coherence in TheSeventies, yes... But go back to any place and time where there has been widespread discrimination against women (namely, AllOfThem), and you will find feminism--or, at least, [[FairForItsDay something that looks like feminism if you squint hard enough]]. The word "feminism" dates back to 1895; the entire "suffragette" movement, in which British women campaigned for the right to vote, began in 1865; and [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_de_Pizan Christine de Pizan]] was writing feminist works as far back as the [[OlderThanPrint early 15th century]]. If you believe that men can be feminists and that one does not need to ''describe'' oneself as a feminist to be one, then the very first might well be Creator/{{Euripides}}, which would make feminism OlderThanFeudalism. (On the other hand, some of his contemporaries called him misogynistic [[UpToEleven even by Ancient Greek standards]].) As for feminist action, you might as well talk about Ancient Romans getting disgusted by how Ancient Greeks treated women (this too is OlderThanFeudalism).
to:
The movement first gained coherence in TheSeventies, yes... But go back to any place and time where there has been widespread discrimination against women (namely, AllOfThem), all of them), and you will find feminism--or, at least, [[FairForItsDay something that looks like feminism if you squint hard enough]]. The word "feminism" dates back to 1895; the entire "suffragette" movement, in which British women campaigned for the right to vote, began in 1865; and [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_de_Pizan Christine de Pizan]] was writing feminist works as far back as the [[OlderThanPrint early 15th century]]. If you believe that men can be feminists and that one does not need to ''describe'' oneself as a feminist to be one, then the very first might well be Creator/{{Euripides}}, which would make feminism OlderThanFeudalism. (On the other hand, some of his contemporaries called him misogynistic [[UpToEleven even by Ancient Greek standards]].) As for feminist action, you might as well talk about Ancient Romans getting disgusted by how Ancient Greeks treated women (this too is OlderThanFeudalism).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
Also, many feminists point out that patriarchy makes it difficult for women to express anger, even if they have legitimate reasons for it, by labeling them with this stereotype.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 161,162 (click to see context) from:
A core goal of feminism's is to push the Venn Diagram of "male tropes" and "female tropes" together until there is ''nothing'' in the AlwaysMale ''and'' the AlwaysFemale page. It has already made a lot of strides in that direction, particularly by adding things that are AlwaysMale to AlwaysFemale. But if you're the kind of person who insists that people and cultures ''must be'' AlwaysMale or AlwaysFemale -- in other words, someone who agrees with the past/current system; in other words, someone who supports patriarchy -- then, yes, it ''looks like'' the "Always Male" category is shrinking and "being a man" is becoming villainized. If this concerns you, please remember that your original assumption -- "tropes must be AlwaysMale or AlwaysFemale" -- bears re-evaluating. Feminism, as a whole, is not trying to destroy maleness, but rather ''redefine'' maleness, in a way that makes everyone, ''even you'', more comfortable in it.
to:
A core goal of feminism's is to push the Venn Diagram of "male tropes" and "female tropes" together until there is ''nothing'' in the AlwaysMale ''and'' the AlwaysFemale page. It has already made a lot of strides in that direction, particularly by adding taking things that are from AlwaysMale to AlwaysFemale.and putting them in the "mutual" area. But if you're the kind of person who insists that people and cultures ''must be'' AlwaysMale or AlwaysFemale -- in other words, someone who agrees with the past/current system; in other words, someone who supports patriarchy -- then, yes, it ''looks like'' the "Always Male" category is shrinking and "being a man" is becoming villainized. If this concerns you, please remember that your original assumption -- "tropes must be AlwaysMale or AlwaysFemale" -- bears re-evaluating. Feminism, as a whole, is not trying to destroy maleness, but rather ''redefine'' maleness, in a way that makes everyone, ''even you'', more comfortable in it.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 83,88 (click to see context) from:
There's a logic to this sentiment. Since feminism sets itself up as the opposite of patriarchy, and since patriarchy holds as ''its'' central tenet the idea that MenAreBetterThanWomen and that women should be oppressed, it is easy to assume, through transitive relation, that ''all'' feminism ''must'' espouse the "LadyLand" trope, patriarchy's gender-flipped opposite where women oppress men.
However, this logic is bound up in what Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} calls [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy kyriarchy]], the overall idea that some group ''must'' have dominant power over other groups. Both patriarchy and matriarchy are subtropes of kyriarchy. It is true that most societies in human history have been kyriarchies, but it does not follow that all societies ''must'' be kyriarchies. And it is this {{utopia}} that feminism strives for: the opposite of kyriarchy ''and'' patriarchy '''''and''''' matriarchy all at once, a land of equality where ''nobody'' is oppressed.
There are certainly a few women who seriously blame men for everything. They are known to academics as "misandrists", and to most mainstream modern feminists as ''wrong''. Most feminists don't think sexism is primarily something all individual men do to all individual women. The problem as they see it is that ''patriarchy'' is nebulous, widespread and intangible. Just as men can, and do, fight patriarchy, women can, and do, act in ways that support it. The point of feminism (as much as such a vast and highly fragmented movement can be said to ''have'' a point) is to raise women to the level of rights/respect that men have had for centuries. The ideal goal is to render men and women equal by ''strengthening women'', not to drag men down lower than women as some cosmic act of revenge.
However, this logic is bound up in what Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} calls [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy kyriarchy]], the overall idea that some group ''must'' have dominant power over other groups. Both patriarchy and matriarchy are subtropes of kyriarchy. It is true that most societies in human history have been kyriarchies, but it does not follow that all societies ''must'' be kyriarchies. And it is this {{utopia}} that feminism strives for: the opposite of kyriarchy ''and'' patriarchy '''''and''''' matriarchy all at once, a land of equality where ''nobody'' is oppressed.
There are certainly a few women who seriously blame men for everything. They are known to academics as "misandrists", and to most mainstream modern feminists as ''wrong''. Most feminists don't think sexism is primarily something all individual men do to all individual women. The problem as they see it is that ''patriarchy'' is nebulous, widespread and intangible. Just as men can, and do, fight patriarchy, women can, and do, act in ways that support it. The point of feminism (as much as such a vast and highly fragmented movement can be said to ''have'' a point) is to raise women to the level of rights/respect that men have had for centuries. The ideal goal is to render men and women equal by ''strengthening women'', not to drag men down lower than women as some cosmic act of revenge.
to:
There's a logic to this sentiment. Since feminism sets itself up as the opposite of patriarchy, and since patriarchy holds as ''its'' central tenet the idea that MenAreBetterThanWomen and that women should be oppressed, it is easy to assume, through transitive relation, that ''all'' feminism ''must'' must espouse the "LadyLand" trope, patriarchy's gender-flipped opposite where women oppress men.
a PersecutionFlip from NoWomansLand to LadyLand, from "men oppressing women" to "women oppressing men."
However, this logic is bound up in what Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} calls [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy kyriarchy]], the overall idea thatsome group ''must'' have dominant power over other groups.every society must involve ''persecution''. Both patriarchy and matriarchy are subtropes of kyriarchy. It is true that most societies in human history have been kyriarchies, but it does not follow that all societies ''must'' be kyriarchies. And it ''This'' is this {{utopia}} that the ThirdOption feminism actually strives for: the opposite of kyriarchy ''and'' patriarchy '''''and''''' matriarchy all at once, a land of equality {{utopia}} where ''nobody'' is oppressed.
There are certainly a few women who seriously blame men for everything. They are known to academics as "misandrists", and to most mainstream modern feminists as ''wrong''. Most feminists don't think sexism is primarily something all individual men do to all individual women. The problem as they see it is that ''patriarchy'' is nebulous, widespread and intangible. Just as men can, and do, fight patriarchy, women can, and do, act in ways that support it. (Notice how the page quote for the "SlutShaming" trope involves ''a woman'' doing the shaming.) The point of feminism (as much as such a vast and highly fragmented movement can be said to ''have'' a point) is to raise women to the level of rights/respect that men have had for centuries. The ideal goal is to render men and women equal by ''strengthening women'', not to drag men down lower than women as some cosmic act of revenge.
However, this logic is bound up in what Wiki/{{Wikipedia}} calls [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyriarchy kyriarchy]], the overall idea that
There are certainly a few women who seriously blame men for everything. They are known to academics as "misandrists", and to most mainstream modern feminists as ''wrong''. Most feminists don't think sexism is primarily something all individual men do to all individual women. The problem as they see it is that ''patriarchy'' is nebulous, widespread and intangible. Just as men can, and do, fight patriarchy, women can, and do, act in ways that support it. (Notice how the page quote for the "SlutShaming" trope involves ''a woman'' doing the shaming.) The point of feminism (as much as such a vast and highly fragmented movement can be said to ''have'' a point) is to raise women to the level of rights/respect that men have had for centuries. The ideal goal is to render men and women equal by ''strengthening women'', not to drag men down lower than women as some cosmic act of revenge.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
Cribbed this from Wikipedia, if anyone thinks they can improve it feel free.
Changed line(s) 36 (click to see context) from:
to:
* Fourth Wave Feminism: A phase of feminism that began around 2012 and is characterized by a focus on the empowerment of women and the use of internet tools, and is centered on intersectionality. The first, second, and third waves of feminism fought for and earned women greater liberation, individualism, and social mobility; the fourth wave continues the push against problematic gendered norms that cause the oppression and marginalization of women in society, the intersectionality of these and other interlocking systems of power, and how these contribute to the stratification of traditionally marginalized groups like women of colour and trans women. Fourth-wave feminists advocate (like earlier feminists) for greater representation of these groups in politics and business, and argue that society would be more equitable if policies and practices incorporated the perspectives of all people. Fourth wave feminism additionally argues for equal pay for equal work, and that the equal opportunities sought for girls and women should extend also to boys and men to overcome gender norms (for example by expressing emotions and feelings freely, expressing themselves physically as they wish, and to be engaged parents to their children). Fourth-wave feminists use print, news, and social media platforms to collaborate and mobilize, speak against abusers of power in seeking for the empowerment of women and seeking justice against assault and harassment, and for bodily autonomy.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 42 (click to see context) from:
* ''Socialist feminism'': A fusion of radical feminism with Marxist feminism. It sees capitalism and patriarchy as mutually reinforcing systems with one making possible the other.
to:
* ''Socialist feminism'': A fusion of radical feminism with Marxist feminism. It sees capitalism and patriarchy as mutually reinforcing systems with one making possible the other.other possible.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 109,110 (click to see context) from:
One particular problem area is when feminist blogs and websites have mocking rules against "what about teh menz?" discussions. These rules are typically placed due to hard experience. When feminism became a thing in the 70s, a pro-feminist counterpart movement sprung up called the "Men's liberation movement," which made the (again, not controversial) claim that sexism also hurts men in plenty of ways (cited examples include the [[DoubleStandard double standards]] in Divorce Laws, treatment of Domestic Violence and [[MenAreTheExpendableGender women's privileges such as their exemption from the Draft]]; [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement see here for more information]]). This movement eventually became a mostly academic discourse and/or was partially absorbed by feminism itself, since their goals do not conflict. Later, a breakaway group, called the "Men's ''Rights'' Movement", went a step further and campaigned actively against feminists, believing that feminism has gone too far, leaving women more privileged than men. Some put forward contentious but not entirely wrong ideas, such as asserting either that men and women are harmed equally by sexism in different ways, things have gone the other way and now feminists are covertly oppressing men ([[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment not completely true, but not completely wrong either]]) and that society promotes female privileges at the expense of men. The problems began when some Men's Right's supporters began to smear all feminists by association with those feminists who are misandrists and gave the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary reactionary]] view that society should undo some of feminism's achievements (''yes'' controversial; [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment please do not discuss it here]]). For obvious reasons, "Men's Rights Activists" tend to find plenty to disagree with on feminism-centered websites, which has resulted in {{Flame War}}s, {{troll}}ing and worse. This is partially why feminists tend to be cautious about how much of that viewpoint they allow into their discussions.
to:
One particular problem area is when feminist blogs and websites have mocking rules against "what about teh menz?" men?" discussions. These rules are typically placed due to hard experience. When feminism became a thing in the 70s, a pro-feminist counterpart movement sprung up called the "Men's liberation movement," which made the (again, not controversial) claim that sexism also hurts men in plenty of ways (cited examples include the [[DoubleStandard double standards]] in Divorce Laws, treatment of Domestic Violence and [[MenAreTheExpendableGender women's privileges such as their exemption from the Draft]]; [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men%27s_rights_movement see here for more information]]). This movement eventually became a mostly academic discourse and/or was partially absorbed by feminism itself, since their goals do not conflict. Later, a breakaway group, called the "Men's ''Rights'' Movement", went a step further and campaigned actively against feminists, believing that feminism has gone too far, leaving women more privileged than men. Some put forward contentious but not entirely wrong ideas, such as asserting either that men and women are harmed equally by sexism in different ways, things have gone the other way and now feminists are covertly oppressing men ([[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment not completely true, but not completely wrong either]]) and that society promotes female privileges at the expense of men. The problems began when some Men's Right's supporters began to smear all feminists by association with those feminists who are misandrists and gave the [[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactionary reactionary]] view that society should undo some of feminism's achievements (''yes'' controversial; [[Administrivia/RuleOfCautiousEditingJudgment please do not discuss it here]]). For obvious reasons, "Men's Rights Activists" tend to find plenty to disagree with on feminism-centered websites, which has resulted in {{Flame War}}s, {{troll}}ing and worse. This is partially why feminists tend to be cautious about how much of that viewpoint they allow into their discussions.
Changed line(s) 113,114 (click to see context) from:
Even when masculist or feminist men are involved in the discussion, there is also an ideological point to be made. Though it is not controversial to point out that sexism hurts men, it changes the tone of a discussion when a man makes that point. It is all-too-easy to infer that he doesn't really care about women's problems unless he is personally affected by them... which, in addition to being a [[ItsAllAboutMe pretty lousy attitude]], is the whole ''point'' of why feminism began.
to:
Even when masculist or feminist pro-feminist men are involved in the a feminist discussion, there is also an ideological point to be made. Though it is not controversial to point out that sexism hurts men, it changes the tone of a discussion centered around feminism when a man makes that point.point since, as mentioned before, feminism gives more of a priority to the issues women struggle with. It is all-too-easy to infer that he doesn't really care about women's problems unless he is personally affected by them... which, in addition to being a [[ItsAllAboutMe pretty lousy attitude]], is the whole ''point'' of why feminism began. \n It's part of why the Men's Liberation Movement emerged in the first place; to give men a space to talk about their issues without seemingly derailing discussions centered around issues facing women.
