Understanding Anti-Feminists - A Detailed Synopsis for Feminists

Understanding Anti-Feminists - A Detailed Synopsis for Feminists

Today, we come full circle back to the issue of gender equality. Since the early 2000's, the feminist movement in the west has become a louder and louder voice in the mainstream media, and have effectively garnered more support for their cause than was ever thought possible a decade ago. As a general fan and lover of women, I'm happy to see that they've made the gains that they have. I'm not one of those individuals who believe that feminism should not exist anymore, but I am one of those individuals who do not personally identify with the feminist movement, nor do I call myself a feminist. Feminism should absolutely not be abolished, despite the fact that women have achieved quite a bit of equality already. Actually I have two main reasons why I believe feminism is still necessary in the western world today, and if you ask me privately, I will tell you why if you are curious

But with all that being said, I still do not identify myself as a feminist. Why? And what does anti-feminism really mean? Well firstly, I don't personally call myself an anti-feminist per se, as i don't disagree with everything feminists claim...but I guess the first logical step to understanding what anti-feminists stand for would be to take a look at what the definition of feminism is, and simply put the words “I am against” in front of it. For simplicity sake, let’s go with the definition that the GaG administrators recently broadcasted, as its fairly short and to the point:

^She claims she's not being paid as much as her male friend. How sure is she?

So as someone who doesn’t identify themselves with the feminist movement, this must mean that I am against the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities. Correct? Well, not quite. I’ve always been a fan of analogies, so lets use one here to help flesh out this point. If you’ve been keeping up with the news, you know that Islamic radicals recently carried out a seemingly coordinated attack in France, Tunisia and Kuwait, killing more than 50 people and leaving many more injured. Now, a non idiot would look at this situation and say “damn those radicals…they don’t speak for all Muslims”, and in my opinion he/she would be correct in saying so. Now what would a non-idiot say who also happened to be an atheist? He/she might say, “damn those radicals…they doesn’t speak for all Muslims, but I do still find some of the ideas within mainstream Islam to be backwards, illogical and lacking evidence.” To them, being an atheist, (a person who does not believe in a god, period) does not mean being blind to the unfair castigations that non-violent Muslims often suffer for the actions of a few radicals. But it does mean that as an atheist living in a free thinking society, they have the right to pick apart the erroneous views and doctrines that mainstream, non violent muslims practise and preach. The situation today concerning feminism is not all that different. The radicals within the movement are often the go-to scapegoat for both sides as a means to an end. MRA’s may use the feminazis as a means to show the world how backwards feminism is, and feminists may use the feminazis as a means to deflect attention off of their mainstream, yet less factually supported views.

The reason why I’m not a feminist today is due to a variety of the non-radical feminists views on certain matters they view as problems/inequalities, and their lack of substantial evidence to prove those particular inequalities exist for the reasons that they believe. It’s not because I am “anti-women’s rights.” Confusing? Look at it another way…I am like the atheist who loves Muslim people, and defends a Muslims right to practise, but criticizes some of things that the non-extremists are practising, as a person who knows God does not exist. The definition of feminism is often too simplified, as the fight towards full gender equality is being fought on multiple fronts, and the real problem/point of contention is that everyone believes that each particular battle needs to be fought in a different way. For the purpose of this take, we’re going to take a look at one of these fronts, and I’m going to try to educate the feminists out there as to why there are seemingly so many people who are anti-feminist today

The front we’re going to look at is the issue of the wage-gap. Why the wage gap? Well, the ideas surrounding the issue of the wage gap and why it exists, are a fairly status quo issue amongst feminists today. It’s not a feminazi view to believe that the wage gap in the USA is not only a 23% gap (the infamous 77 cents to every male dollar), but is also an example of widespread gender inequality, spurred by the sexist bias of CEO's. In my opinion, the data does not support this, but feminists will take this issue and push for policies that puts the onus on business owners to implement measures which I believe simply give an advantage to women over men which is not necessary. Lets dig into the details. For the purpose of the myTake, we’ll focus on the situation in the USA.

So the oft touted statistic by American politicians is that women receive 77 cents for every dollar a man earns. Now, some amongst the anti-feminism camp will say that this stat is a lie, and that there is no wage gap. They’re wrong. A wage gap does exist between men and women. The problem with this statistic however is that it adds next to no control variables. It simply takes the total amount of money men are making across all jobs, and compares it to the total money being made by women across all jobs. It does not factor in extremely crucial data, such as the average amount of hours worked between men and women, the levels of education between men and women, the kinds of jobs men pursue versus the ones that women pursue, and a whole bunch of other things that should be taken into account. Of coarse, politicians rarely care about the devil in the details, but I do.

If you’re having trouble understanding this, we can look at the issue in a small fictional microcosm. Say that we lived in a world with only ten people (5 men and 5 women). There are only two careers available…one is a scientist, and the other is a secretary. Lets say that 4 of the 5 men went to become a scientist, and they worked a full day doing that, while only 1 woman went into that field, and she only worked half a day because she had a kid to take care of back home. Now, we all know that scientists generally make more than secretaries, and we also know that people who work longer are going to be paid more in the same field than people who work less. Basically, when a politicians says that women make only 77 cents to every male dollar, they are taking the total amount of money these 5 men and 5 women make and comparing it to each other, without taking into account how long they are working for and what career fields they chose to work in.

A better study would take a look at all the scientists working, and compare only the women and the men who were working comparable hours for example, and see if the pay gap still exists. Then they would add another control variable, say the levels of education between male and female scientists who worked comparable hours, and they would see if a gap still existed…and so on down the line. Now if we expand back into the bigger picture, we can already think of quite a few reasons why a woman may be making less than a man. The studies that politicians and some feminists like use are not always the same studies that I like to use. Not that there is necessarily anything wrong with those studies in particular, but the interpretation of them are often misconstrued to make the problem look larger than it actually is. Fortunately, the general public is privy to studies that do just as I and many others believe needs to be done before coming to a decision on the wage gap issue.

One such study done by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) called, Graduating to a Pay Gap decided to take a look at this issue with a more scientific approach. The study was done by two women, Christianne Corbett (who has her masters degree in cultural anthropology and a bachelors in aerospace engineering) and Catherine Hill (who has her PhD in public policy) who are both members of the AAUW. They conducted a fairly rigorous study of the pay gap issue, where they looked at students one year after graduation and compared their earnings, while taking into account factors such as “college major, hours of work, economic sector and the presence of children”

Now I encourage you all to at least read through a bit of what they did, as it is worth your time, but for our purposes, the conclusion of this type of rigorous study is most important. What they come up with?

This model shows that in 2009, women working full time or multiple jobs one year after college graduation earned, other things being equal, 6.6 percent less than their male peers did. This estimate controls for differences in graduates’ occupation, economic sector, hours worked, employment status (having multiple jobs as opposed to one full-time job), months unemployed since graduation, grade point average, undergraduate major, kind of institution attended, age, geographical region, and marital status.

So what we first see here is that the apparent wage gap, when real control variables are taken into account, is much smaller than 23%….more like 6.6%. And this number doesn’t even include absolutely every control variable that could be used to explain the adjusted gaps existence (This is explained further by an article in the Huffington Post that looked at the study in question). But lets take a look at this 6.6% number. Is this adjusted wage gap due to sexism? According to the AAUW, its “unexplained” or in other words, they have no proof of a gender bias. Going further, they stated that,

individual choices make a difference

such as “choosing your college major carefully”, “researching your intended occupation”, “learning how to negotiate” and “seeking out union jobs”. With even more research done on this matter, and more necessary control variables added, is it possible that this 6.6% gap is even lower? Quite possibly. But what does the U.S. government have to say about this...more specifically, the branches of government actually responsible for crunching numbers and studying data. For this, we turn to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and the U.S. Department of Labour. Now for those of you unfamiliar with what the St. Louis Federal Reserve bank is, its basically one of twelve reserve banks that act as regional arms to the U.S. central bank, known as the federal reserve. These aren’t banks where citizens get to store their money in, like your local JP Morgan Chase. No, these are the banks in control of the currency itself, and are responsible for micromanaging the economy on behalf of the government. The head central bank is controlled by a board of governors, with a chairman (appointed by the president of the United States) at its head (currently, its a woman named Janet Yellen). Anyways, the St. Louis Fed took a look into the wage gap issue, and published a whole piece on the matter on their website. The people working at the central bank are amongst Americas best when it comes to economics and crunching numbers, and what they found was that when looking at reliable data, the wage gap was actually much smaller than what people thought it was. One such study I would like to highlight for the purpose of this take was the one overseen by the U.S. Department of Labour. Here is what they found:

A recent report prepared for the U.S. Department of Labor analyzed the gender wage gap using Current Population Survey (CPS) data for 2007. The report takes into account differences between men and women in educational attainment, work experience, occupation, career interruptions, part-time status and overtime worked. The result is striking—these factors explain approximately three-fourths of the 2007 raw gender hourly wage gap of 20.4 percent. The adjusted 2007 gender hourly wage gap is roughly 5 percent

Now when you actually follow the source provided by the St. Louis Fed for this, you can find the report done by the U.S. Department of Labour, and they concluded in the paper that adjusted wage gap,

may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.

Interesting how both the U.S. Department of Labour and the AAUW came to almost the same numbers and pretty much the same conclusion. Far from being an issue of unscrupulous male CEO’s trying to cut corners by paying women less, it actually becomes an issue of women making less career savvy choices and conducted less wage negotiations with their bosses in comparison to their male counterparts.

^Are they all just feminazis?

Now I purposefully used those sources as sources for this take, because too often, i find that men trying to argue their point, will use sources that are questionable at best. You wouldn’t (and probably shouldn’t) trust a source from Fox News to tell you how great women and blacks have it. But if a group of diligent and educated women, from a respected organization fighting for women’s rights, who have a natural bias towards proving that the wage gap issue is as big as feminists claim, do a study which shows that the feminists don’t have it quite right, you start to question not only this issue, but other issues that non-radical feminists have certain stats for that sound a bit outlandish on the surface. Even more convincing is when you have central bankers, arguably the smartest economists in the world, telling you that the wage gap issue is not as big as people say it is. At this point, you’ve opened a legitimate point of contention within the feminist camp…a point of contention which i find often has no room for debate within feminist circles, because just like many social movements, there's often a lack of nuance.

Despite this evidence being readily available, you still see this total misunderstanding of the wage gap issue amongst feminists today. Here’s a recent example i dug up from a myTake posted by a GaG admin.

Note the part that I highlighted, “Equal pay for equal work (If we’re doing the same work, why should men get paid more?)”

My response to this given the data? Equal pay for equal work already virtually exists in the USA. The problem is that women en masse, across the broad spectrum of available careers, are not doing exactly the same work as you claim. Not only are you not doing the same work, but when you do actually do the same work, you are not doing it for as long, or with as much expertise (amongst other things) as men are. This does not mean men are smarter. They aren't. It just means they are doing something right. Referring again to the U.S. Department of Labor on the matter…the wage gap "may be almost entirely the result of individual choices being made by both male and female workers.” And with the adjusted 5 to 7 percent gap that “may” exist, the hard proof which shows that its due to any sort of gender bias just isn’t there. The AAUW notes that part of the new 6.6-cent wage-gap they found may be owed to women's supposedly inferior negotiating skills, and not unscrupulous employers.

So when we come back full circle to this issue of feminists versus anti-feminists, this is what we have: We have a playground where one side (feminists) live in a bit of a bubble on certain matters concerning gender equality which they have yet to escape from. On the side of anti-feminists, you also have people who occupy a bubble. These particular anti-feminists are on the right side when it comes to the issue of the wage gap, but only by default. These are the anti-feminists who just hate women, and will be anti-women no matter what the issue may be. But individuals with a more nuanced point of view, the ones who see the right and wrong of both sides, often choose to identify with neither side too strictly (egalitarian is often the term of choice, but its a term often used by non-egalitarians to describe themselves, so be careful with this). So when you hear certain people make the claim that feminism is not for equality, but is looking for female superiority, think about the issue of the wage gap. This is but one example which i picked because it acts as a microcosom to the whole gender equality debate, which is filled with several different battlegrounds such as this, that turn out to have important details beyond what normal feminists preach.

What would it look like to a non feminist (lets call him Jack) who looks at some of the real data I described above, then turns on the tv or the computer to see a fairly run of the mill feminist claim that, “because the wage gap is 77 cents to the dollar earned by a male…we need to push for legislative action to give women an advantage to even the playing field against this clear gender bias”? Wouldn’t Jack’s reaction be something like, “Okay let me get this straight… according to the data, there is almost no wage gap when some personal choice factors are taken into account, and the much smaller gap that may or may not apparently exist actually isn’t proven to be due to a particular gender bias on the part of CEO’s…and yet I see fairly typical, non-man hating feminists like Hilary Clinton, Obama and respected feminist bloggers pushing for legislative action to be taken to deal with what i view as an almost non existent problem?…sounds like they are trying to give women advantages over men in the workplace that they do not need” This is the root of the “feminism = women > men” viewpoint. The wage gap issue is just one issue amongst several that are like this, but I use it as an example for simplicity sake. Feminism is more than just a belief about women gaining equal opportunities. It’s also about figuring out what the problems actually are and how to actually solve them...and that my friends, is where we often disagree.




Join the discussion



What Girls Said 6

  • Great take. Those companies run by mainly men will still prefer men...

    • thanks :) though i think a lot of these companies will prefer to hire the person with the best resume... as they tend to care more about money than gender

    • Show All
    • @abundantlyrich @bubble_tea
      This is sometimes true, sometimes not. But the problem is that it's a legitimate concern for some top-tier positions within a company.

      Getting pregnant means losing time. Getting a girl pregnant does not. This is just an unfortunate consequence of being a female, just like not having certain reproductive rights is an unfortunate consequence of being a male.

    • Another thing to consider is that these companies are run by older folks who worked their way up over a very long period. This means that these are people who started climbing the ladder back in, say, the 50's.

      They are mostly men, because women mostly didn't work at the time.

      Companies can't all just spring out of the ground like Facebook or Google did. It often takes decades. This means that the equality we see today might not be seen in fortune 500 companies for another few decades, when THIS generation's female entrepreneurs have established their large companies.

  • @Equal pay for equal work already virtually exists in the USA. The problem is that women en masse, across the broad spectrum of available careers, are not doing exactly the same work as you claim. Not only are you not doing the same work, but when you do actually do the same work, you are not doing it for as long, or with as much expertise (amongst other things) as men are.

    you didn't back this up at all. you just tossed out your opinion with same platitude about choices and declared weve come full circle. i dont think the circle budged. you started off saying its bc women maker based choices and get pregnant and take care of kids, and ended with saying its bc women make bad choices without taking your own assertion seriously.

    what work are we not doing the same as in the sea, me job. what work are we not doing as long what work are shittier at... based on what what are your sources and how many women do they actually cover. you have information that explains pay difference for millions of women coming down to that individual woman's choice? how did you find time to go through all of those profiles.

    • i notice you keep saying 'm my problem with non radical feminists' does that mean you agree with radical feminism? what do you think radical feminism is? i only ask bc you state non radical which means you must have ideas about radical. do you know why radical feminism was called radical feminism? has to do with roots.

    • Show All
    • and by non radical feminists, im talking about the feminists who don't hate men. Simple. I don't agree with radical feminism, obviously. Its a very simple distinction between the kinds of feminists that normal feminists often distance themselves from.

    • it did come full circle but apparently it flew over your head. one of the main reasons women earn less is because they work less or picked a career that paid less.

      the take owned isn't saying its a bad choice that they had a kid and need to take care of them but lets say it takes you an hour to pick them up from school every day thats 1 hour you aren't working everyday it adds up and most of the time you won't have time to work overtime like most men do.
      its not just women with kids many women take off work early, never ask for a pay raise, dont work extra days, dont work overtime etc

  • I'm going to be honest, I think the extremist have ruined "feminism" and I think people are too stupid to differentiate extremist and feminist. And now women and men are too embarrassed to say out loud that they support it because it's such a popular thing to hate now. And that just blows my mind how much of little bitches people can be when something becomes popular to hate.

    People need to stop being sheep and grow up already, feminism is very much needed still, all over the world and the definition of feminist and feminism itself is not offensive or extremist.

    The thing I don't understand is why do people have an issue with the word or definition of feminism based off of extremists views? Feminism itself and the definition of it is not offensive and it's definitely still needed, mainly in other parts of the world besides western culture. Feminism doesn't just mean people should be concerned with equal pay and free nipples. There are serious issues outside of western culture especially, like rape, forced marriage, gender multiplication etc. So why is the word feminist limited to these very minuscule western culture examples.

    It's no different than identifying yourself as a Christian but having everyone use all of the bad things that religion has caused, thrown in your face like that some how was caused by you personally. People are taking the most extreme and worse examples of something and generalizing everyone and it's really getting old and it's honestly very pathetic.

    • "It's no different than identifying yourself as a Christian but having everyone use all of the bad things that religion has caused, thrown in your face like that some how was caused by you personally."

      That's exactly how I felt as a man in feminist circles.

      Also, regardless of whether or not I choose the title, I am not going to prove my support for the women subjugated in 3rd world countries by protesting "man-spreading" and turning a blind eye to the lack of fair trial in campus sex incidents.

      I supported the former, but called bullshit on the latter, and was called "non-feminist scum". As such, the definition was made pretty clear.

    • Show All
    • "The only ones who matter"- yeah to the people who are close minded and equally as hateful.

      I'm always going to always speak out against something that is wrong, even if it's a label that i'm associated with it. I'm white and when white people are racist, I speak out against them, i'm a woman and when women are wrong, I speak out against them. I'm southern and when people are racist/homophobic, I speak out against that as well. Labels don't limit you to agreeing with assumptions placed on them.

      I keep hearing over and over "if you're a feminist then why don't you do something about it". But what you aren't taking into consideration is that my issue is women's rights in other countries, where we would get murdered for speaking out.

    • It's no difference than you not agreeing with ISIS, yet I don't see you over there protesting them, why?

      So what exactly do you propose women like me do, women who want equal rights for everyone, in every country, other than to speak out?

  • I've for the longest time thought what you said to be true.. and then I came across this gender bias study. There are no good reasons why a man and a woman with the same resume would get different salary offers for the same job, different perception of their competence and willingness to mentor them.


    • There are a few reasons for why this may be the case, but let me tackle one thing first:

      Firstly, its important to note the difference between this take/the studies i used, and this study you posted. This study's focus was highly highly specific. They were looking specifically at the shortfall in scientists (so basically people hired to do lab work)... so we're not even talking about the whole field of science here. Only one particular subgroup which are scientists. This is partly why the sample size is so tiny (they only surveyed 127 people from 6 universities) and they only studied university faculty members who oversaw research positions at their schools.

    • Show All
    • Actually, and many will probably hate me for saying it, I think there is this elitist thinking in women who made it in male-dominated fields. They too had to prove they were 'worthy as men' by being 'better than men' and probably had a much harder time since sexism was normal back then. They like to think they’re unicorns. So they will (sub) consciously demand the same standard from the next women to take their places.
      If you look at the salaries in table 1, the males offered on average 3400 less, while the females offered 4300 less to the female student.
      Maybe I totally wrong in this and they were just going by what they themselves were offered back then and adjusted those numbers to inflation and rise of living costs.

    • I agree and I also think that a 23% per year gap is a bit too much of stretch and a difference you would probably only see on Wall Street. But I also think, that even if you take away all the logical variables like flexible hours and overtime, there is still this invisible subtle gender bias that favours men. You called it 'unexplained', I call it subtle gender bias that people subconsciously or consciously do.
      If questioned they can either easily or not that easily give reasons why they felt that way. Those reasons may be logical on the surface, but may be more comprised of a set of confirmation bias and stereotypes that may only go away once you see more and more stay-at-home-dads and men willing to ask for flexible hours or reducing their full-time jobs to part-time jobs to spend as much or even more time with their children as their working wives.

  • i was all up for feminism till some feminists started eating period blood, hating men, and freeing their nipples. im still up for equality though but i do like being treated like a lady. that doesn't mean that i want a man to completely take care of me. i just like to be held and to feel protected in my mans arms.

  • I think it's very important to be critical of statistical figures and not to blindly accept things that people tell you. I had heard, however, that the 23% difference was a cumulative figure instead of an average figure. It's not inconceivable to me that over a woman's lifetime, she could make 23% less money than a man might (if by the start of her career she earns 6.6% less and accumulating this disparity throughout the ages). I would like to see more rigorous analysis of this as well.

    I found this study published by the University of Indiana that you may find interesting: it compares the extrapolated earning potentials of men and women by degree and degree level over their lifetimes: www.incontext.indiana.edu/.../article1.asp

    • im reading a bit through that study, but the problem i have with these extrapolations is that they miss what i consider to be fairly important control variables. When you're talking about jobs, especially ones like business and sales, there are so many things that go into not only being a good salesman, but also earning the maximum amount of dollars possible. One thing often not taken into account in these long term extrapolations is actually seeing how long people actually worked for over their lifetimes, and how much of that was taken to do other more important things. Particularly in the case of women, they often work less hours over their lifetimes than men due to the responsibility they feel they have to rearing their children. Things are still rather traditional, where the woman will often allow her husband to continue further in his career, while she takes slightly more of a backseat to raise the kids. That's just one factor amongst several which these extrapolations

    • Show All
    • @Transigence an academic source is still more reliable than your average newspaper, regardless of the presence of an agenda or not.

    • Totally. No disagreement there.

What Guys Said 15

  • A decent mytake

    As far as I am concerned though it used to be a good group but now like any group it's become corrupt it's core values gone.

    And when a group starts resorting to disturbing things and physically altering their bodies just to make a point, bullying and or threatening folks. That's when it needs to be put down and stopped.

  • Very interesting take. What we should try to gather from this is precisely why men and women choose different professions that have different levels of income. What culturally is still preventing women from wanting to choose some of the higher earning careers that men choose? I'm in an engineering club in my college and there's only like 3 women and 2 of them are international students from the carribean who are majoring in engineering to help their communities back home.

    I just wonder what is it that socially drives men and women into different corners? Is it gender roles? Government policies? I know in some Scandinavian nations both men and women can get leave when they choose to have kids. Maybe knowing they'll have to take time off sways their decisions? I don't know I'll have to do research because I hate not knowing.

    • Yes i agree. If anything, I believe that more women need to go into STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) versus what i find women tend to go into, which is liberal arts degrees which are often easier (in terms of acquiring a higher GPA) but have less demand/value in the marketplace, and lead to lower paying jobs on average. My university chemistry class seemed pretty close in terms of the gender divide (and that class had about 1000 students), but most of the women were largely Asian... which tells me that it may be more of a cultural thing, because Asian women (like men) are trained pretty hard by their parents to pursue STEM fields.

    • At my school there are even these women in engineering events where female engineers come in to give women the confidence to pursue these fields. It's interesting that gender roles in Asia tend to be more traditional but since education is highly valued there's more women in those fields or at the very least studying those fields.

  • The thing is, I cannot get behind this concept of Feminism all together. People like to say that there is 'feminazi's and 'feminists', and that the nazis make the rest of them look bad... This is websters dictionary meaning of feminism:
    : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes
    : organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

    You can't cherry pick one or the other, it's both... and number two is clearly what it's about. You can ask yourself this to kill any notion that feminism is for equality of genders. What rights have feminists ever advocated for, for males, in the interest of equalizing something that males are more prone to, such as homelessness? The answer is nothing, ever. It is not an equalist movement, it never was. It was purely about garnering more laws in favor of women. So these 'regular' feminists quietly sit back and watch and at the most, maybe they say 'gee, those other feminists have issues with men'. However, the feminazis have in fact made laws so virulent to families, particularly men and children. So there's a loud minority advocating through groups such as NOW, for more rights for women, at mens expense. And a silent majority of 'reasonable feminists' who quietly accept the benefits of the radicals. As an anti-feminist, like myself, I reject all forms of it because of this. It was an entirely foolish notion that by focusing on the welfare of specifically one gender, you would get 'equality'. And on that topic of equality, probably the most annoying thing about feminists is how they define 'equality'. To me, the only thing that matters is equality of opportunity. This is to say that we all have the same options available to us, some will fail, others will excel, and we live with the consequences of our failures. When feminists say equality, they are typically referring to equality of outcome, or gender parity. Which is to say we NEED more women in X profession to make it 50/50. Why does it have to be 50/50? I haven't heard feminists advocating for more women working in the trash pickup businesses... Gee, I wonder why? And they are not above using our tax dollars to offer all manner of grants and aid to get more women into the STEM fields for instance. Why should my tax dollars be used to advocate for a position that negatively impacts me, a man? Feminism is a joke, that teaches men they're evil and women that they're victims who need it to be saved (by feminism of course).

  • Hit it right in the head. Feminist say that they are about equality. When in all actuality they are not. The very word "Feminist" in itself is gender biased.

    If there still is a wage gap it's for a reason. Employers who hire women or interview women take in to consideration the fact that she might become pregnant and obviously, require baby leave. More times than not she will return to work after a month or so. Sometimes she may never return to work. Therefore this is a risk that employers take into consideration when paying and hiring employees.

  • There's a difference between feminist and feminazi, one is good, one is bad, I think you'll know which is bad. I'm a feminist and I'm a freaking guy!

    • no, no your right - you being a guy has nothing to do with not having to be a feminist - a feminist is a humanist therefore a feminist is a woman or a man so, you can be a guy and be a feminist!

      I have no idea if I made sense so forgive me if I didnt! But I hope I did

  • This all comes back to Patriarchy theory. It is the corner stone of Feminism, it's a threat narrative conspiracy theory in which all men oppress all women. This means that every woman's father, grandpa, brothers, sons, friends, husband etc.. is oppressing her. That men are all sociopaths who oppress the people they form their most intimate relationships with and that this is the natural state of men. This narrative is the basis for all feminist theory.

    It is a mystery to me how feminism isn't treated like any other mental illness instead it's taught at our University's and is used a guiding light to aid in forming public policy and laws.

  • This sums up my thoughts on feminism pretty nicely. A bunch of spoiled women quibbling about petty things while simultaneously knowing nothing about said petty things. The only oppression is in their brain.

  • The fact is, that only SOME men get paid more than women. White men get paid more than any other race of male and female.

  • In my opinion, any woman still daft enough to be self-identifying as a feminist, is not going to listen to a bunch of facts which prove her wrong. If she was capable of that, she'd have stopped branding herself a feminist some time ago.

    So nice try, but you'll never convince the ones who need convincing the most.

    • Spot on, to a feminist facts = "mansplaining" this is one of feminisms many shaming terms used to silence any who would contradict their sacred holy feminist dogma.

  • Another thing to consider is how people are trying to explain the fact that women tend to gravitate towards social majors and men tend to gravitate towards technical ones, calling it a complete social fabrication.

    It is insulting to women to tell them that they didn't not choose their own career paths. And it is condescending to go out and say that schools need to offer "Galgebra" and "Girl-flavored physics".

    I suppose I'm what C. H. Sommers would call a "freedom feminist". I support anyone's right to make choices in their lives, and to not assume things or create restrictions just because you are a woman, a man, black, white, etc. But I do not support imposing on people's choices for the sake of making a select few numbers pretty.

    • And that's the thing. Even when these differences ARE socialized, the decisions are ultimately hers. If a girl was raised on the idea that "women should be housewives", and she grows up wanting to be a housewife, who are you to tell her that she would be happier as an engineer, just because her interests were socialized?

  • Wow interesting my take !
    Thanks for sharing it with us :)

  • Nice take @Watermelonoma
    That makes 2 in a roll

  • I like analogies too but this was rather exhausting to read. Too much over-explaining which made the thing more long-winded than it needed to be. The points you made are good, but adding less fluff would certainly make your synopsis more palatable.

  • I think child law other laws witch support woman more, girls have to pay in dates equally, ladies first have to be stopped and say any one can be first and so... list never stops

    • Stopping child laws would be a foolish idea with no discernible progressive approach. Just my opinion.

    • What , she can give birth to a child without hemn permission but he have to py for him it is actually a bad idea

  • Hey there! I actually could not read the full take now, I am exhausted. However, as a feminist who is QUITE tired of simple tirades calling all feminists evil man haters... I must say I'm very impressed--or, no, that's not the right word, because I'm not really surprised that there are reasonable and intelligent people who do not identify as feminists, but more just grateful. Because I'm sure I can learn something more from reading this, and I'm definitely going to enjoy seeing it from another, yet not hateful, perspective. So thank you, definitely, for writing this.