this post was submitted on 14 Aug 2025
130 points (92.8% liked)
Asklemmy
49978 readers
563 users here now
A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions
If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!
- Open-ended question
- Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
- Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
- Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
- An actual topic of discussion
Looking for support?
Looking for a community?
- Lemmyverse: community search
- sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
- !lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities
~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't believe in an -ism. I believe in equal rights. I think the name feminism does more harm than good.
"isms" are useful, and the name feminism is perfectly fine.
Why does the name do harm? If it was "anti-sexism" instead would it be more appealing, or are all "-ism" labels bad in your mind? (Might I ask why the -ism is problematic? Would you have the same view of anti-racism, for example?)
Egalitarianism is a better term.
That just erases that, currently, women are far more oppressed than men. Men are negatively impacted by patriarchal society as well, we all stand to gain from its abolition, but erasing that it is women that are most subjugated makes room for opportunists to coopt the movement and shut down women.
This.
This is the kind of thinking that pushes men away from feminism. When there is a clear intention to favor one sex over the other, the other will obviously be much less inclined to help.
There is no intention to "favor one sex over the other." The present system is explicitly cismale-supremacist. Any attempt to erase that weakens the movement and serves to perpetuate sexism against women and non-binary folk. This is similar to the "All Lives Matter" movement as a way to disrupt the "Black Lives Matter" movement.
It might not be the intention but modern day feminism has become so much about what women can and cannot do and how men are pigs.
No, it hasn't. This is the way conservatives frame the feminist movement, but the actual reality of feminism is far more grounded. When you cede the narrative and legitimize the conservative viewpoint, you weaken the movement.
I am a very strong believer of feminism but I will never accept that in public. It has a strong negative reaction from many people. Actions don’t evoke a negative reaction.
Where I live, there are literally people who mock people for being feminists while sending their daughters to professional colleges, allowing them to work, letting them decide if and when to have kids, etc. I don't know, maybe this is a cultural difference.
That just cedes ground to the socially reactionary. It's better to organize under the label of feminism and push for the necessary change, without letting reactionaries be coddled.
What's the point? Words don’t mean anything. Positive actions are happening, that is all that matters.
Same reason cedeing Black Lives Matter to All Lives Matter is harmful.
How? If things are getting better, why to make it an issue and disturb social interactions?
Not sure I understand what you're trying to say.
I'm not OP, but many people associate feminism with strengthening women specifically. If you look up the definition it actually does focus gender equality, no matter what gender you have. So from my perspective the term isn't really intuitive.
Another thing I don't like about the definition (at least the one on Wikipedia) is...
While I sure get what they mean, I personally don't like to classify one's point of view as 'male'. I agree that there are far more toxic men that seek more and more power. But i don't dislike such people because they are men. I'd dislike their behavior just as much if they were women, non-binaries or any other gender. Classifying a character trait male IMHO is similar to calling a skirt or dress 'women clothes'.
So yes, to me personally, anti-sexism / anti-discrimination or even better pro-equality are more appealing.
Do you think women face more inequality than men? What gender inequality is there to address, i.e. why does feminism as a movement of gender equality exist?
Yes, I think women face more inquality than men. And queer people face even more discrimination than women. But also cis-men that don't fit well into the traditional gender roles, can face discrimation. I do not object the ideology behind femism. I just don't like the term.
Women face different inequality than men. Where women are treated as valuable property, men are treated as disposable tools or dangerous threats. Feminism has done much to elevate women above valuable property, but men are still treated as disposable or dangerous.
I think women do experience more gender based adversities, but I worry framing it like that creates an "us and them" situation between genders. We should fight inequality wherever it exists.
It also misses intersectionality. Not all men are advantaged over all women. A man born in poverty, violence, with a disability, or of a marginalised race, isn't automatically better off than a rich white women born to a good supportive family.
Labels that start off as descriptive become prescriptive. People who associate strongly with a label are less likely to have nuance to their views or change their minds. It becomes us and them.
You can become a prisoner of your labels.
isn't feminism prescriptive / normative to begin with? It's not a neutral description of injustice, it's a call to action, a movement ... no?
I hear you on the strong connection to a label, the way us-them dynamics can be dangerous - but the extreme opposite doesn't seem to work either, so I don't see this as a full justification of rejecting labels. If you are invested in a movement towards equal rights, sometimes having a banner to organize under and communicate by is useful ... it might be helpful to think of a time before the feminist movement existed, and the motivations that exist for the movement.
The fact that there are so many definitions of what feminism is, shows that the label is not super useful. If you say you're a feminist, you then have to explain which version you're taking about.
It could be anything from "people should be given equal opportunity" to the extreme "all sex between a man and a women is rape"