For the third time in two years, a male issues lecture was interrupted on a Canadian university campus. Even Israel-Palestine debates are more civil than this (kind of). Last year it was U of T, this year it looks like it’s Queens. After campus police moved the lecture and restricted entrance, they pulled the fire alarm, which is a federal offense. Of course, no one was charged.
This is why I hate feminists. It’s an outdated ideology at best, and sorely absent where it’s needed (third world countries). Women who ***** about laws in the West are hilariously misinformed (75 cents to a dollar stat anyone?). I need to have a word with PCG.
Last year’s protest, which is actually a bit disturbing imo.
Get what? Whenever a lecturer at a university tries to present their argument for why feminism has changed for the worse, or why men have issues that need addressing, these groups show up and harass everyone.
Feminism started in the west. And changed the world for the better. One can’t pick and choose where it’s needed. Or where it’s needed more. It’s needed everywhere.
Ironically the ladies who mock these women wouldn’t be where they r today without western feminists.
With all due respect Southie uncle, preaching about feminism and continuing to insist that women are the victims, even when they’re clearly intimidating lecturers and stifling discourse that goes against their ideology, is irresponsible.
The real feminists who fought for equal rights are either dead or old.
Now it’s mostly attention seekers who only want the benefits but not the costs.
PS: they should have removed those screaming women from the room instead of not continuing with it. But then again, then you would get the bs that un ke saath zulm hua.
I’m personally a little reluctant to completely abandon the feminist movement because it’s almost a disavowal of all the great strides forward that were accomplished in the name of the cause. As much as people point to what women have lost due to the feminist movement, to be considered an equal and valued member of society and to have doors opened and opportunities made available has been the greatest win. But with all of that said and the no denying that early feminists did some great things, it’s also a reality that like most causes, you’ve got your centrists and then your extremists and I’ve never related to the extremists.I’ve never been a bra-burning feminist who demands or claims that women should be equal to men in all ways, I recognize physiological differences and certain social constructs that accommodate for those physiological differences.
I would be much happier to think that feminism evolved into moderate egalitarianism which strives for equality for all - regardless of sex, creed, race or religion - while at the same accommodates for physiological differences.
So, while feminism may need to evolve/change in the Western world to account for the strides forward - how do you modify feminism to be regionally-based? In underdeveloped and developing nations, where a stunt like that would be a reasonable response and way of agitation to bring attention to a righteous cause, how do you moderate feminism to be location/cause/region-specific?
I cannot wait for the fifth wave feminism to emerge, as nothing can be more embarrassing and counter productive than fourth wave pontifical reactionary rubbish that’s currently known as feminism in Western World. Unfortunately, all great movements after a certain point get hijacked, and feminism is no different.
You don’t. Feminism is an umbrella movement, it never had, and never will have one set of unified agenda and one particular direction. It encompass struggle for diverse range of issues - some are more regional and class based, while others with wholly national appeal. In order for Feminism to become as successful and established in developing countries as it is in the Western world, they need to stop blindly imitating the structure and views of present day Western feminism, and start following the movement from over hundred years back. The gross gender inequalities and injustice of Western World at the wake of 20th century are literally identical to the problems women are facing in the developing countries. So there ought to be a Woman’s Movement in the developing countries before feminism.
^ I agree with this. But the problem lately is a denigration of the feminist movement as a whole - it seems to be an all or nothing proposition. Despite feminism always being stratified across a spectrum, feminism is now considered bad, fullstop.
While in an ideal world feminism would go back to its roots or it would evolve to the form of feminism the pragmatists see as being effective and equitable - it comes back to how do you impose one’s own value system on another and make others see things my way? Why is “my way” the right way?
Not necessarily. Women’s groups are still quite respected and true to the cause, sexism is still treated very seriously. However, the term feminism has become a political label, seen as a hostile enterprise, and a stream of misandrist first world whinging. But whatever it is, it’s largely a Western problem. The developing world must work towards launching a Reform oriented Women’s Movement witnessed by the Western World over hundred years ago. For now they should really study and seek inspiration, and guidance from feminism in interwar years and feminism before the First World War, simply because they would be able to relate more with all problems and the solutions that came as a result.
Feminism cannot go back to its roots in the Western World as the movement had achieved far more than what it had originally aimed for in the first, second and even third wave feminism. What the movement can do is to go back to its socialist heritage, and genuinely talk about the plight of working class women and men.
when you add ‘men’ into it… how is it still ‘feminism’ ? Wouldn’t become more of a general social reformist sort of movement? Its the female centric objective that lends it the ‘femi’ in its name doesn’t it?
You are entitled to whatever conclusions u want to draw. Don’t bother me one bit. I owed it to OP that I was basing my comments on generalities rather than specifics.
Other than that how r u doing today pwner? Things going well for ya?
That would be called Humanism. Feminism is concerned solely with women’s issues. We talk about the wage gap all the time - one of the biggest BS stats in the Western world. Who perpetuates this? We talk about single moms but ignore which gender is overrepresented amongst the homeless. We talk about breast cancer, the women it kills, and the funding it receives (or lack thereof), all the while ignoring prostate cancer, which kills more men and receives less funding. And don’t even get me started on divorce laws and child custody, makes me scared to get married.
Even first wave feminists have been quoted as saying that the movement has been hijacked by “man hating” women, who promote sexism against men. I’ll try to find the exact quote.
If you truly believe the part in bold, then you’re not a feminist, you’re a humanist. Both sexes have issues that need addressing, and perpetuating the myth that women still need preferential treatment should be considered insulting to women. The trouble is that as soon as you even try to talk about this, the crap show above happens.
If you’re truly interested, read Dr. Warren Farrell’s book, The Myth of Male Power. It’s truly mind blowing how misandry has become commonplace in Western culture. We’re shielded by it, being Desi and witnessing the sexism that exists against women in our culture, but it certainly exists. He was a part of second wave feminism, and a member on the board of NOW, so hardly misogynistic. He’s now considered a rape apologist by some feminists.
As for your last point, I think the feminist movement in the third world has to begin there. It can be nurtured by organizations in the West, but unless it’s grounded, funded, and supported regionally, it won’t be sustainable.
I would argue that it got hijacked because many of the issues that remain are on the fringe. See the book I linked in my post above, and tell me if you still believe that there needs to be a fifth wave feminist movement.
I would like to think that social progress has been made to the point that men and women can discuss issues relating to each sex together, without the need for gender specific monikers and organizations, which only segregate issues and people.
No no, a lot of early days suffragettes and woman’s workers were very sympathetic to working class men’s grievances, and some of them actively fought for universal disfranchisement, better pay and better working conditions for both men and women. The term feminism emerged as a popular title in 60s and 70s, and this is when things started to a lot more robust, and eventually quite divisive and aggressive. But most of the feminists of yesteryears had socialist conscious, and they genuinely cared about building happy and fairer communities.
I haven’t read the book, hence cannot comment. Yes, I do think there needs to be fifth wave feminism, since the fourth one has failed so dismally, I would like to see a more structured, focused and flexible and egalitarianist movement designed to talk about a wide range of issues of concerning women and men in a multicultural society.
