Thursday, 28 May 2015

Why It's Feminism And Not "Equalism"

Or men could just sympathise lol


So this is something that's really bugged me for a while now, and it just makes me want to sit everyone down and explain it to them all at the same time. I want to make a three or four page PowerPoint and send it to everyone I know (but that would be kind of weird), anyway the point is I just want everyone to understand this as it is v v important (in my opinion)!!!!

So people say "why is it called feminism, why is not equalism?" like "if it's about equality why is it leaning in favour of women?"


Yes, feminism is about equality of the sexes, not about women or men being better, but about equality, a level playing field. So why call it "feminism" which indicates a movement specifically about women?


Think about it like this: you're chilling in the park right, and you're with your mate on the seesaw and they chilling, but you've got this heavy ass bag on your lap with bricks in it and shit, and you just can't seem to move it however much you try, so your mate is up and you're down but you're like... excuse me I wanna get my feet off this damn tarmac. But you can't get the bag of bricks off your lap. If you take the bricks off, you can rise and become at a level with your friend (because you're both the same weight OK, oh man I should have said twins, but anyway yeah you're the same height and weight let's assume)
We can't call it equalism yet because the see saw isn't balanced and it is women who are sitting with their feet on the tarmac trying to offload the bricks so they can let physics do it's thing and let the two seats level out. You get me??

People who say "it should be equalism" are completely disregarding the fact that women are the ones who are actually facing the struggle (and when I talk about women facing a struggle I do not just mean people like me and people I know living in the UK who get catcalled and groped in clubs I am talking about women in warzones who are raped and married off to random men aged twelve, I am talking about all of them).

And that's why it's feminism and not equalism, because it's women who need to be treated differently, its the woman's seat that needs to rise (is this see saw analogy actually working lol). Because it's about women becoming equal to men. Not the other way around.

Anyway so there it is, hope that doesn't make you feel too uncomfortable.


T said...

Egalitarianism does not dismiss the fact that women need rights, in comparison to feminism, it only adds that men need some rights as well.

Instead of a see-saw where when we're at 50-50 weight distribution we're equally balanced, I'm gonna come up with the two beaker example. How full each beaker is represents how many "rights" or how equal the gender is. 100% full means no discrimination takes place towards that gender, they have all the rights a human being should have. At the moment, I'd agree that the male beaker is fuller than the female beaker, but it's important to note that neither beaker is full.

Therefore, an egalitarian would work for all people (both beakers) and try to fill both up without sacrificing the other, whereas feminism works only to fill up the female beaker, sometimes even by taking some from the male beaker.

In comparison to your last paragraph: it's both women and men who need to be treated differently, it's both beakers that must be filled to the brim. It's about both genders being fully equal together, with no unjust discrimination on either.

Anonymous said...

How does feminism detract from the rights of men? If anything, elements of feminism such as the push for the recognition of gender as non-binary and the disintegration of gender stereotyping has improved the lives of everyone who doesn't feel comfortable in the binary - an example that springs to mind is guys that would like to wear make up.

Because feminists push for equal rights, men will inevitably benefit too. But men shouldn't need to be constantly reminded of this to see feminism as a cause worth supporting. Feminists are people who said 'hey we're going to do some work for the equality of women now'. 'Egalitarians' are people who recognised the important work feminists do for equality and screamed 'BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?' despite the fact that feminists wanting EQUALITY means both (all) sexes will be EQUAL. In conclusion, there is far more work to be done to achieve equal rights for women than men; a name and an ethos shouldn't need to pander to men's egos to be worthwhile.

T said...

Equity feminism doesn't, yes. Gender feminism not so much. Some feminist movements have resulted in, or attempted to, lower the position of men such that the genders become equal, at men's rights deficit and women's rights benefit. For example this, although I don't exactly agree with the blog title.

Your argument for the empowerment of LGBTQ people is valid, but note that men's rights/egalitarian views also agree with this.

Your entire second paragraph (bar the last sentence, but I'll come back to that) is all based on the notion that when women are finally empowered to the point that they have all their rights, they're finally equal with men and everything is hunky dory. To the contrary, egalitarianism also points out that men do not have all the rights that they should have at the moment. It's not trying to shift the attention to men and scream "BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?!", it works to both empower women, a la feminism is doing, but also remembering that some men's rights need to be campaigned for as well.

For example, these are the focal points of the Men's Rights Movement.

...there is far more work to be done to achieve equal rights for women than men...
Agreed, as an ex-muslim I'm acutely aware of the amount of discrimination still prevalent in the middle-east.

...a name and an ethos shouldn't need to pander to men's egos to be worthwhile.
Disagreed, you make it sound as if egalitarianism is some reactionary movement to feminism that wants to screem "BUT WHAT ABOUT THE MENZ?". Rather, it's a movement for equality. That pays attention to women's rights, men's rights and everyone-inbetween's rights.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a feminist too, but my feminism is a subset of my egalitarianism.

T said...

Quick edit: Of course the middle-east reference is an example, not the sole case in which women's rights needs more work than men's rights. Just to clarify and remove any possible confusion.