I am a right-libertarian. I believe in a very small, very weak government and prefer a laissez-faire approach. I oppose many forms of welfare, labor regulations, subsidies, and social programs.
However, I also believe all humans have equal rights, and that all people should be judged as individuals. In my opinion, men and women should be able to do whatever they want, so long as they have the ability, means, and consent of others involved.
I would like to consider myself a feminist, but it seems that many feminist organizations have a definite left-leaning orientation. Many feminist groups advocate things like universal healthcare, equal pay laws, or special legal protections for women. As a libertarian, I can not support using the state to achieve these goals, just as I would oppose laws against racist speech even though I hate racism.
Can I still be a feminist, if I oppose gender roles and discrimination, but NOT using the state to oppose them? Or must I be a progressive?
2006-09-23 13:14:56 · 11 answers · asked by timm1776 5 in Social Science ➔ Gender Studies
I am an American, by the way. I realize that universal healthcare is standard in many countries, but it is favored mostly by left-leaning people in my country. I also use the term "libertarian" in the American sense.
Please try to focus on answering the question, rather than criticizing my political ideology. It's fine to take issue with my beliefs, but please do so only as it relates to feminism, instead of just dismissing my ideas because you don't like them.
2006-09-23 13:17:52 · update #1
Sorry if I am overly complicated. What I am asking is:
Can you be a feminist, but also against the idea of making sexism illegal?
2006-09-23 13:20:58 · update #2
Paul H- Actually, I am trying to get a million different answers. That's why I avoided defining feminism. I want everyone to answer according to their own, personal interpretation of the word.
2006-09-23 13:24:16 · update #3
Most neo-feminists are anti-male, or so it seems. There are different feminist movements in different academic arenas that are still productive and make decent points, but unfortunately a lot of feminists have done nothing but make other women look bad, and a lot of it very left-leaning.
I am a leftist, and a female, but I love to wear makeup and do my hair and wear cute clothes. Many women I went to college with would call me a pawn of men or whatever, but I don't care, I have worked hard to be where I am and I will continue to work hard. And a little lip-gloss has never hurt anyone.
2006-09-23 14:03:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what a true feminist is anymore. When I was growing up in the 60s and 70s, feminism meant that I could grow up and be a stay-at-home wife and mother if I wanted, but if I wanted to have a career and remain single and/or childless, that was okay too. I was taught by the feminism from back then that I could choose whatever paths I wanted to in life, and I should not care what anyone else thought about it. I owe that kind of feminism a great deal of gratitude. I am married, but I have a career and I have chosen to remain childless, even going so far as to have my tubes tied.
The feminism of today is so different. It's not a feminism that empowers women; it's an ideology that women are superior, gender differences are nonexistent, children are accessories, and men are unnecessary. I do not support this type of feminism, and it is sad to me to see the turn the movement has taken.
The ideology that once empowered me and opened up the doors of opportunity to me now embarrasses me because it is prejudiced, socialistic and angry beyond belief.
Having said all that, I used to be a feminist, and now I would classify myself as an individual who can think for herself and form her own opinions and judgments and make right and good decisions for her life.
I appreciate your question, but I have to ask you, is it really necessary for us to label ourselves as belonging to any group or ideology? I think both people and the world are much too complex to categorize into such finite terms.
2006-09-23 22:10:54 · answer #2 · answered by No Shortage 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Personally, I don't think you can say you are a feminist without being an extreme feminist on all fronts. I tried and during that time, only saw hatred and superiority complex isuues. Now I say I used to be a feminist. They don't like conservative people who desire a simple equality across the board (men would be considered equal to women then -big nono). So even though I am a woman, I am LESS than "them" because I have a conservative faith and that is not within the liberal feminist views.
-You could be a "humanist"
2006-09-24 00:25:22 · answer #3 · answered by mommaof4 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
tim
Don't lower standards to calling yourself a feminist. Just be a proud libertarian. Modern day feminist have no use for people with our beliefs.
Modern day feminist have completely abandoned the original intent of the feminist movement and now simply exist to promote the far-left intrusive big government agenda. It is not your fault they have strayed so far from the original goals.
2006-09-23 20:37:38 · answer #4 · answered by Zak 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Ask a million different "feminists" what it means to be one and you will get a million different answers. Some will be similar, but none of them will be exactly the same. Feminism is not the same thing from one person to the next - you need to be much more specific about what you mean by "feminism" - who's "brand" of it are you referring to?
2006-09-23 20:20:13 · answer #5 · answered by Paul H 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe so.
Much of modern "I'm conservative, but a TRUE feminist!" movement is based on religious conservatism and the idea that what's best for ALL women is marrying, having children, and staying at home. And that modern feminism has destroyed our "natural desires." I object to that. I also object to the same things you do, and I'll toss in state-funded paid maternity leave and lactation rooms forced on worksites.
Any extreme is bad.
2006-09-23 20:19:19 · answer #6 · answered by morelli26 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think I don't understand how you intend to see anything close to equality if not through the state.
I would guess that your priorities and methods would indeed vary greatly from most of the groups; that's kind of the system we have right now, so that's what most of the groups channel their energies into.
2006-09-24 02:21:10 · answer #7 · answered by Atropis 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes
2006-09-23 20:22:26 · answer #8 · answered by Kikka 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What?
I dont think I understood, but I'll try and answer what I think your asking:
Yes you can be all of those things. Or none or both. No 2 ppl are alike when it come to personality.
2006-09-23 20:19:00 · answer #9 · answered by Sekkennight 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. I haven't had such a lecture since Social Work class with my boring, neo-socialist, activist instructor.
2006-09-23 20:37:30 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋