What is the primary purpose of feminism?

[lumberjack_jeff]

In the past I have heard the view that feminism shouldn't be held responsible for fixing issues of inequality that don't harm women. The specific example used was boys educational outcomes. The summary of that view was something along the lines of; "if you want to advocate for boys, form your own movement".

At other times, those who question any of the principles, tactics and main issues of feminism (using NOW, or AAUW as exemplary) are criticized as being unsupportive of equality.

For the purposes of this poll, the view "feminism is achieving equality by promoting women's interests" constitutes a "B" vote; equality from this perspective is a side affect of advocacy for women - a secondary consideration.


===============================
edited first paragraph

[tekisui]

1. Feminism is the Radical Notion that Women are People

[Jim__]

2. Do you have a link to the other thread? - n/t

[lumberjack_jeff]

4. No, it was several months ago

But the topic came up again in the below thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4788184&mesg_id=4788184

If the provenance of the quote is an issue, I believe there's still time for me to delete it from the poll if you wish.

====================================

I've edited the OP to remove the mention of another thread

[Jim__]

12. There was no issue. I just wanted to read the other thread. Thanks - n/t

[wryter2000]

3. Caveat

I'm a woman who voted for equality. However, I am very leery of arguments for why boys/men need more resources than girls/women. They can be thinly veiled excuses for not helping girls out. The "boys need more help with education" argument often falls into that category. Yes, boys get into trouble when they act out, but folks often ignore the fact that girls can get pregnant when they act out.

Similarly, arguing that boys need to get more attention from teachers serves to maintain a status quo that results in girls not doing as well as they could in subjects like science and math.

[lumberjack_jeff]

5. That's certainly a possible outcome.

For myself, I think there are probably ways to fix the problem that 5th grade boys read at a grade level a year and a half behind the girls that do not drag the girls down to the boys reading level.

[mcctatas]

6. Feminism is not solely about promoting equality...

there has to be some reconciliation policy involved to adress issues such as employent and family life.

[lumberjack_jeff]

7. Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "reconciliation policy"? n/t

[mcctatas]

8. K...

after class, if I don't leave now, I'll be late...

[BoneDaddy]

25. reconciliation?

such as?

[EFerrari]

9. There are several if not many theories of feminism

so I can't really respond to this poll. Feminism is itself not a monolith. :shrug:

[TahitiNut]

10. Indeed.

Anyone who claims to be one has their own "expert" definition. Pointless stuff. :shrug:

(I wonder if my two decades as a dues-paying member of NOW qualifies me? Naww... wrong chromosomes.)

[lumberjack_jeff]

11. Is the reality that 18 year old men are required to register for the selective service

... an issue which feminism should address? Specifically, is it an issue that NOW ought to express an opinion on?

It's clearly a legally-enshrined inequality. Absent any leadership from NOW on the issue, the only logical conclusion I can reach leads me to a "b" response.

[EFerrari]

13. NOW is not the boss of feminism. They are only one organization

in a vast field. And the answer you got from different points in that field would be different depending on who you asked.

[EFerrari]

14. from Wiki's "history of feminism" entry:

Feminists have divided the movement's history into three "waves". The first wave refers to that of the nineteenth through early twentieth centuries, which dealt mainly with the Suffrage movement. The second wave (1960s-1980s) attempted to right legal and cultural inequalities. The third wave (1990s-present) is seen as both a continuation and a response to the perceived failures of the second wave.<3[br />
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#History_of_feminism

[Luminous Animal]

27. NOW has addressed it...

The organization believes that it is both discriminatory and unconstitutional.

http://findfederalagency.com/selective-service-system-sss

A federal district court ruled in 1980 that the exclusion of women from the draft was unconstitutional, a position that was endorsed by the National Organization for Women, an advocacy group for women's rights.

[blondeatlast]

15. Precisely. I'd like to ask the OP to define civil rights to begin with.

We all know what it ISN'T, but what it is can't be defined.

[lumberjack_jeff]

18. We are each entitled to our definitions.

The task of developing a consensus definition of civil rights is a hard one. This does not mean that champions of civil rights should not know what that means to us.

I believe that the same is true of feminism.

The absence of one "boss of feminism" doesn't imply that there is no definition, it means there are multiple definitions. If it were otherwise, I needn't ask the question - I could just go to the dictionary.

... but I wasn't really asking about a definition, I was looking more for its purpose - its mission.

[EFerrari]

19. But that's the problem. The purpose or mission shifts

depending on your theoretical framework.

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. If my definition of civil rights shifts depending on the circumstances...

... then it's hard to avoid the conclusion that I'm not advocating inherently for civil rights, but advocating on behalf of one or more constituencies.

Honestly, I don't have a problem with that concept. I'm a strong advocate for the civil rights of the disabled and native americans, for instance. My zeal for civil rights waxes and wanes depending on my appraisal of the need in the specific circumstance.

[EFerrari]

21. Not on the circumstances but on the theoretical underpinning.

A second wave feminist would respond in a different way than a third wave feminist, for example. An American feminist would likely respond in a different way than a French feminist and then, you have individual viewpoints.

And a third wave feminist might tell you there is no need to resolve this plurality. :)

Personally, since my only sibling is a brother and my two children are boys and since I'm a pacifist, I'd say no one should be conscripted, period. Do I think the current legal inequality is the provenance of feminism? Yes. Any inequality is to my mind. But then, I tend to be 2.5 Wavish. :)

/oops

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. I'm a man and think feminism is about human dignity and freedom.

[TahitiNut]

17. Sounds like "humanism" to me.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

22. Except humanism is patriarchal and so there is a real difference.

:smoke:

[TahitiNut]

24. Sounds like "paternalism" to me.

:smoke:

But I tend to be a literalist. :dunce:

[Orsino]

23. It's one facet of equality.

It's the wingers that attempt to divide us, for example, by pretending that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is a separate issue from the integration of women or African-Americans into the armed services.

[SoCalDem]

26. Unfortunately, every "equality movement" has a built-in "push-back"

Women's rights automatically is seen by some, as a take-away from men.. Civil rights for blacks became a take-away from whites..

Whatever the status quo, BEFORE a movement starts will always resist, and eagerly throw rocks at the "new way"..

There is always a finite amount of "whatever", in these people's eyes, and any amount of sharing or re-distributing, automatically reduces "their share"..