Fun Stuff > BAND

women and music

<< < (20/29) > >>

KvP:
I wouldn't suggest that "Fucked if you do, fucked if you don't" isn't something that a man in feminist discourse legitimately feels. There is a lot of real frustration and conflict with trying to live out feminist ideals as a man, that's part of recognizing and mitigating privilege. But is a resignation, not a justification, for disregarding the issues that it raises. You're not saying "This is impossible", you're saying "This is too hard", or perhaps more accurately, "I am being asked to give more than I am comfortable with". The trick is holding people accountable while not being a harsh taskmaster, but also not treating them like children.

Johnny C:
feminisms

i don't think a conversation about feminism with a woman who doesn't like or agree with it because she's misinformed has to be about telling her what to believe. i think it just has to be about maybe why you believe it's worthwhile. also i had similar reasoning for not calling myself a feminist (i.e. i am literally patriarchy walking) but feminists i explained that to (and also like dudes who face oppression e.g. a native american guy from one of my classes) kept getting mad at me about it and insisted that i not use that as an excuse for not being a feminist so now whatever fuck it i'm a feminist and proud of it

ALoveSupreme:
I agree with those people, really.  I am a minority male who self identifies as a feminist and I really don't see a problem with that.  I don't know who these women are that give you shit for being a progressive human being but that's ridiculous.  Identifying as a feminist doesn't mean you have to have an answer to non-feminists and it doesn't mean you have to be a "perfect" feminist.  But I feel like if you support women's rights and recognize that the "system" (be it societal or whatever) isn't perfect and is still skewed to enable men more than women, you're doing fine and you don't need to pretend to be anything else. 

pwhodges:
I'm a humanist.

The thing with specific -isms  is that to be worthwhile they must be transitional; they succeed by not needing to exist.  Of course, I realise that they can have partial successes by improving matters on the way.

ALoveSupreme:
I agree with that in theory but it doesn't really hold up realistically.  For example, a person that aligns with a conservative philosophy could consider themselves a "humanist," but support an abortion ban.  This would not be typically considered in line with "feminist" ideology (so far as I understand it).  While they may believe they support something that is best for "human beings," it may not work out that way to someone else who would simply consider themselves a "humanist."

I am IN NO WAY trying to incite an abortion debate, it's simply the easiest example I could come up with.

 

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page