Asklemmy

I call myself egalitarian. It distinctly means what you mean by feminist without being so readily confused with what she means by feminist.

I guess I'm a feminist, but I don't really call myself a feminist. I call myself a humanist, maybe even an environmentalist, because I believe that all humans, and animals, and the environment should have rights, and should be protected against greedy, scared and powerhungry (sick) individuals.

I consider myself egalitarian

I feel like the term Feminist gives too much of an impression that I tolerate or encourage misandry, which I certainly do not. That and if you look at feminist groups throughout history TERFs have been the norm, not the exception.

Egalitarian, because sexism cannot be tolerated no matter which direction it's facing.

If feminism is defined as equal rights for all things that are not gender relevant I agree. But there are a lot of really good exception, where it makes sense that we acknowledge differences. Like pregnancy, physical differences and so on. In short everything that can be equal should be.

I am a feminist.

Feminism means all genders should be treated equal, but that does not mean men should also get paid menstrual leaves at their job. Equal rights, yes. Everyone should be treated fairly.

I do believe gender is a social construct that's becoming outdated. And that we shouldn't have nor woman nor men, at all.

Make of that what you want.

I will say yes, because I am a woman who has benefited from what feminists did in the past, and don't believe in strict gender roles for men or women, and my kids were all born as girls, I had to work a lot to get them good education, my focus has necessarily been more on advancing the lives of girls than boys, I didn't get boys until I married.

I think humanity as a whole is stronger when women are stronger. Empowering women empowers men too, when we all do more we are stronger, it's not a zero sum thing.

So yeah I think so, yes, soy feminista.

It means if you think women should have the same rights as men. I am a feminist.

I would call myself a feminist because I believe in equality. You know, fuck sexism.

I don't believe in an -ism. I believe in equal rights. I think the name feminism does more harm than good.

I think I'm more egalitarian. But this is largely dependent on what you mean by feminism.

I believe all women should have total agency over themselves. I believe they deserve equal pay, treatment, and rights. I believe them when they discuss their issues and the prevalence of sexual assault and abuse.

I also believe that there are structures in our society that unfairly put them above men. For instance, in child care and criminal sentencing. Women tend to get the benefit of doubt that they are the better parent and that the relationship between a child and a mother is generally more important than that of a child and father. Women also, in general, get lighter sentences for the same crime.

I believe that we should be more equal in the value we place on the relationship between a child and it's father. Raising the importance of how we as a society view that relationship rather than bringing down the importance of the mothers relationship.

I also believe we should lighten the sentences of men to be more in line with women's sentencing. Although that largely falls in line with my personal opinion that criminal sentencing in this country is far, far too harsh.

There are various schools of feminism, some of which have conflicting opinions. But the common feminist standpoints, like equal rights, seem to be just common sense for me, especially in this day and age. I'm not sure where the requirement for equal physical ability fits into the equation.

At least for me, going out and saying that you are feminist carries a sort of special connotation, and since I haven't participated in any explicitly activist events related to feminism, I wouldn't readily emblazon myself with the feminist label even though I stand by those ideas.

My definition of feminism is roughly: People of all genders share equal legal rights and social respect. This doesn't mean biological differences aren't real or shouldn't be considered.

So yes, I consider myself a feminist as I have defined above. I do support biological segregation of things like athletics. I say biological since there are obvious outliers when it comes to hormones, muscle mass, and reaction time differences between the biological sexes.

I see feminism as a component of minimizing heirarchy and moving toward anarchy.

Instead of the liberal conception of rights, I would use equality of individual liberty and social solidarity regardless of gender or sex. Definitionally, I claim gender as performative and sex as related to procreative genitals. Maybe it's all just worbs, that is, political words without meaning.

Those in favor of heirarchy use "equality of outcome" as a bludgeon. Humans do not need "equality of outcome". We need autonomy to make choices about our lives. We need societies that take care of each other. Heirarchies such as patriarchy prevent making choices and taking care of each other.

As a bonus rant, the rube statement, "What is a woman?", can be answered with, "Who is pink for?". The provocateur wants to conflate gender and sex, but is too embarassed to come out and discuss genitals. A logical follow-up for the embarassed trap-setter could be, "Which genitals taste the best?". The point being don't entertain traps with anything but hostility.

I know posting is masturbatory, since I often fail to read replies. I'm sure your reply will be great and I will probably fail to read it. I'm still working on social solidarity.

I prefer the term egalitarian or something to that effect. I definitely fall under the definition of a feminist, but I think it's sort of ironic that a term for equality has an inherent bias for women in the word itself, even if it is not the intended meaning.

I think the word itself has actually harmed the movement significantly. Turns out the words we use matter a lot. So again, I prefer a more neutral sounding term, like egalitarianism or equal rights.

Yes, bc I support equality. That's it. That's all it means. I try to treat others the way I would want to be treated. I try not to be an asshole to others. I know sometimes I fail, but I don't go out of my way to do it. If somebody tells me I did something incorrect or hurtful, I don't get offended, I just try to do better in the future if I see them again.

I didn't know that supporting feminism was just supporting equality until I was an adult bc nobody ever taught me that. It's not really surprising to me that some people attach other meanings to the word (both positive and negative), or that some people are opposed to it because of whatever negative things they may have attached to it.

It is still very surprising to me that there are people who will openly admit they're just strongly opposed to equality. From my perspective, if you're opposed to equality, that means you're opposed to treating others as you would want them to treat you. You're intentionally being an asshole, and you kinda forfeit any expectations of respect from other people. I still believe you're entitled to the same rights as anyone else, but getting called out for being an asshole is not a violation of your rights. Equality means it's ok to be an asshole to another asshole. That is feminism to me.

JK Rowling and the other TERFs have kinda ruined that term just like the american right soiled the flag.

I prefer "egalitarian" at this point, less loaded, and gender inclusive. I'm one of those radicals where I want non-traditional families, no gender roles, and all the vanilla straight stuff to all exist side by side in harmony.

Also, women's clothes needs real pockets. And men need cuter clothes like shortalls. That's a world I want to be a part of :)

The one thing I'm not egalitarian about- straight men need to be taught to pee sitting down, or at least lift the seat, damn. I know it's not all of you, but there are a couple of animals out there that need help. :p

(This comment uses translation software.)

Yes. I am a feminist, though I am skeptical.

Some feminists argue(Article in Japanese) that the gender equality brought about by feminism also liberates men from the suffering unique to them.

I take a similar stance, believing that the 'gender equality' brought about by male feminism, which seeks happiness for men, also liberates women from the suffering unique to them. In some ways, I am a reactionary feminist.

Previously, I was a male feminist with old-fashioned thinking, striving to eliminate only women's suffering, not men's.

However, I changed my mind after the Japanese government, where I live, adopted a policy of allocating "female admission quotas" at prestigious universities, including national universities, as part of its affirmative action program, modeled on America's racial admission quotas.

Even back when I supported traditional feminism, I was critical of the current state of university education in Japan, where there are public women's universities but no public men's universities. I also believe that expanding these quotas to general universities would violate the Constitution, which proclaims gender equality. I cannot trust traditional Japanese feminism, which supports the unconstitutional status quo, and that is why I have become the skeptical feminist I mentioned earlier.

Yes. Because we should strive to treat everyone equally

I support freedom of women to make their own decisions and live their live as they see fit. I think this makes me a feminist.