Fuck dictionary.com.
[fingers in ears]
Did the web collapse after I published that? No? Good.
Everyone’s favorite online reference tool defines a feminist as “A person whose beliefs and behavior are based on feminism” while defining feminism as “1. Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.” and “2. The movement organized around this belief.”
Sounds tame enough, but to Twisty, them’s fighting words:
There are inner circles of class solidarity into which an outside “sympathizer” simply cannot tactfully incurse or reasonably expect to be invited. Raise money for causes? Sure. Vote for progressive legislation? Duh. Support the movement rather than pretend to sympathize, risk-free, with individuals? Word. But there comes a point at which one must be content to align oneself with the ideology, and then politely get the hell out their way.
Chris Clarke’s suiting up for battle, too. Twisty references his assertion of his non-feminism in which he surmised he could no more be a feminist for supporting their cause than he could a Chicana for supporting theirs.
Unsurprisingly, the Almighty Dictionary of 1s and 0s defines Chicana as “A Mexican-American woman or girl,” which is considerably more exclusive than a “person” who believes something.
Definitions of “feminist” akin to dictionary.com’s functionally reduce it to an intellectual or academic position that anyone can enjoy. It denegrates the idea that there’s a serious fight ongoing and that the battle scars from female oppression are real and deep, deep enough that those outside the subjugated population can only understand to a certain point. That’s part of what Chris and Twisty bring to the table, and I think they’re right.
The debates around this subject always seem to fall into are men/aren’t men see-saw slapfights. But what happens when Chris, Twisty, and friends finally win the good fight? We will have negated male inclusion into the category of “feminist,” but what does that make those of us who try to support the cause as much as we can? Can we call ourselves anything descriptive?
Perhaps we’re still patriarachs. We still benefit from the patriarchy, often more than passively, whether we want to or not. But we’re not invested in preserving the system in the same way as a true patriarch, and accepting the label implies an endorsement of the value set. I think I’ll pass.
Surely we should have our own cool group, though. We should create something to use as a rallying cry, something in which we can claim membership so we don’t feel marginalized in our exclusion… by… women. Wait a sec. Something’s fishy here.
If you’re a man and have ever felt shame or resentment or frustration over simply being excluded from being called a feminist, or even felt a desire to simply have an equivalent term attached to your name, stop and think honestly about your motivation.
Are you short of other things to call yourself? Surely you’re also a “scuba-diving afficionado” or “frustrated democrat” or “freemason” or some shit. There are lots of clubs for you to join — after all, we’re dudes, and who the fuck is gonna exclude us (unless we aren’t white, but that’s a separate issue for the moment)? “Feminism” isn’t a club, though. I don’t care what dictionary.com says. [audience gasps]
Are you upset that feminists don’t appear to value your contributions? Be careful here, because if you’re seeking a label you can flaunt to boost your pride, you might be doing this for the wrong reasons and/or be a lot more hot air than actual belief. Arguably, in light of the state of things, supporting the cause of real equality as much as you can is more of a basic (but neglected) male duty than something you should be trying to brag about.
Are you _sure_ you just don’t like the idea of a woman or group of women having or being something you can’t? Think carefully. It can be a lot scarier than you think to confront the depths to which the expectation of male dominance has been ingrained.
I started this post with the idea that I would come up with fun terms for us to use in lieu of “feminist” for supportive men. As I began to write, though, it occurred to me that maybe my motives weren’t so pure. Maybe, deep down, I was trying to make sure I had just as much stuff as women have, plus all the junk I get just for being a guy. Even if it was more of a light-hearted effort, some part of me wanted to make sure I could be in a group _just like_ feminists so I felt better. And that realization was TEH SUCK. I like to think I never, ever let myself be caught in a patriarchal thought, even for a single moment, but that isn’t really possible.
And bam. There it is. You can’t ever, ever, ever be feminist, guys. Stop trying. I work as hard as I can to do the right things, say the right words, and be in the right mindset, but even when I was trying to write about the topic itself, I caught myself in a trap. We’re _not_ on the inside. We’ve been socialized completely differently and it shows more than we want to admit. And don’t try to make some separate-but-equal club for yourself, either; I doubt you’ll find any motivations of which to be proud once you scratch the surface. I didn’t.
So are we pro-feminist, feminist supporters, feminist friendly, or something similar? Fine by me. If we need a label, requiring us to use one that is subjugative to “feminist” seems reasonable to this feminist supporter and hopefully to you other fellows out there.
Suck it up. Feminists have to do it all the time.
How about “Ladies’ Auxiliary?”
I kid, I kid.
This is pretty damn good. You sure you’re not a feminist?
The Pink Unicornist Movement.
Can’t agree with this. Anyone who supports racism is, by definition, a racist. By the same token, anyone supporting feminism is a feminist. Or would you have another name for those who supported the KKK but didn’t lynch blacks themselves?
[...] I’ve posted on the subject before, coming down on the side of those who argue men can’t claim the label. I believe that, for many men, the desire to be called a feminist is subconsciously driven by the patriarchal conditioning that we men have a right to be included in whatever group or movement we want provided we play by the rules. I don’t think this is always the case, and am certainly not accusing Charlie of it. But I think it’s a valuable, often unstated element of the debate and needs to be considered by men who reflexively expect to be let in. It can be tough to admit one’s motivations aren’t pure; it was for me. But if even a few people recognize something about themselves of which they weren’t previously aware, that makes the semantic debate worthwhile. [...]
Hey apock
You completely missed the point with your semantic reductionism. Read the last part of the posting again where it says: “If we need a label, requiring us to use one that is subjugative to “feminist” seems reasonable to this feminist supporter and hopefully to you other fellows out there.”
I guess it’s too much for your ego for you to, as Twisty say “get the hell out of the way”.
Thanks for listening