this post was submitted on 16 Sep 2026
79 points (91.6% liked)

Asklemmy

55570 readers
496 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'm a cis male and I believe in the importance of feminism, but I hesitate to call myself a feminist because it seems like there is a presumption of understanding women's experiences as if I was part of the Me Too movement. In some binary sense given how hateful and shitty men can be I'm absolutely a feminist, but I wouldn't declare myself to be one. What is your standpoint?

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] story@lemmy.zip 3 points 6 hours ago

yeah it's useful to call yourself a feminist and it doesn't cost much. you might be overthinking this, do not deprive yourself of future interactions with people who share your values

Of course you're a feminist, you have feminist beliefs.

[–] daniskarma@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 9 hours ago

I don't have a gender (I lost it somewhere, sorry), and I still call myself feminist.

I think feminism is something more related to the fight against a type of oppression rather than an identity thing.

I'm a woman who calls myself a feminist because I don't want to let the transphobes known as TERFs (Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists) have the word. (Potentially useful to highlight that whilst not all transphobes are TERFs, all TERFs are transphobes)

Some people are opposed to using the term TERF because of how misogynistic TERF ideology is β€” they don't just hurt trans women, but all women. Whilst I agree that their form of feminism is harmful to women everywhere and vehemently disagree with their views, there is no "Council of Feminists" who decree who gets to call themselves a feminist. So if I want to call myself a feminist, it means having to share the room with TERFs. I don't like that, but I'd rather do it than let them define what it means to be a feminist.

[–] SpongyAneurysm@feddit.org 2 points 9 hours ago (1 children)

I once met a girl (or should I say, she once met me), who wore a shirt that said: "Feminism is the radical notion, that women are people, too. "

So, yes, I consider myself a feminist.

[–] MrShankles@reddthat.com 1 points 7 hours ago

Now I have Norwegion Wood stuck in my head

[–] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 1 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago)

Yes. Though there are men who just wear the word as a label without changing their behaviour, it’s up to men to set a positive example of how we should treat women and each other.

[–] DrivebyHaiku@lemmy.ca 10 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Absolutely would call myself a feminist and here's the reason. Calling yourself a feminist is a declaration that you aren't in performance for brownie points for men's sake and you aren't going to fade to the background the first second the going gets tough. Feminists don't "hate men" but the fact that their issues get sidelined the minute anybody's feelings about their personal masculinity gets hurt means most of the time any discussion about women's issues become about mincing around insecure men.

Feminism is egalitarianism, it is strictly NOT female superiority. The issue with calling feminism egalitarianism is it tends to be a label summerizing the passive part of the movement that asks nothing of people.

Systems that aren't artificially adjusted just end up replicating the same shit they always had over and over and the adjustments don't feel fair or equal to the people who have always benefitted before the change. Justice sometimes meaning giving up something to the party in need. Damn near everyone is up for equality in theory, but the moment they are asked to give up anything suddenly it's women's superiority. They don't look at being passed over for the promotion in favor of an equally deserving and more generally underrepresented woman as being just or needed when it's them who doesn't get chosen. They still in their heart of hearts believe that whenever a woman comes out on top it's not because she deserves to be there.

And it's hard. It's hard to put justice first. It's hard to hire someone who isn't your close personal friend who looks just like you and instead choose someone who acts or looks different who you won't be as comfortable around. It's hard to change your culture to be mindful of needs you don't personally have to make someone else comfortable. The whole POINT is that it's hard. Everything that is hard for you is a comfort, a point without personal friction you have, a PRIVILEGE that you are purposefully choosing to not cash in on anymore because that privilege was never on the table for someone else.

If you aren't willing to face the minor discomfort of being devisive and calling yourself a feminist and gaining the ire of other men what other comforts are you not going to give up?

[–] Denixen@feddit.nu 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Feminism is egalitarianism, it is strictly NOT female superiority

Exactly, the latter is matriarchy and that's the one I really want to try out! I don't think it would be perfect but I am just curious how it would turn out? For science!

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world -1 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

I grew up being taught feminism is about equality between men and women. It's not about one sex being dominant over the other. In that sense, yes, I'm a feminist. But unfortunately, I later learned in life that feminism and gender equality is taught differently in different places, or not at all. Feminism has morphed in the minds of many that it's about women getting privilege.

[–] waterwasamistake@lemmy.zip 1 points 35 minutes ago (1 children)

You mean the propaganda against feminism, worked on you?

[–] TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world 1 points 30 minutes ago

Where did I say I am against feminism? Did you miss basic comprehension in preschool?

[–] CultLeader4Hire@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

Yes and if someone had a knee jerk reaction to that that gives me valuable info about them. If they want to know more about it they’re free to ask, or make assumptions, doesn’t matter to me how other people feel about the word.

[–] MrOtingocni@lemmy.world 3 points 15 hours ago
[–] gucken@lemmy.ml 2 points 14 hours ago

Fellow cis-gendered male feminist, we outchea

[–] Sivecano@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 16 hours ago

I absolutely call myself a feminist even if the word isn't maybe entirely descriptive anymore.

This is our fight too.

[–] bruzzard@lemmy.world 0 points 10 hours ago

I remind myself that it's mindfulness, speech and conduct that that matter. Labels by themselves are meaningless.

[–] Juice@midwest.social 13 points 1 day ago

Feminism is a social movement, made up of the practical activity of people in solidarity with each other. While centering and amplifying the voices and experiences of women and other victims of chauvinism is absolutely essential, remember that there is an incredible need to organize. Movements need people to take notes, make phone calls, promote campaigns, educate, show up to events, share our own experiences where people we care about were victims of patriarchy, and much much more.

Feminism isn't just an idea, and patriarchy victimizes men as well as women, though obviously in drastically different ways and to drastically different degrees. Ideas don't make up social movements, people do. Ideas help us name the world/the problem, which is the first step of revolution, but actual abolition of social structures takes work. Leaving all that work to the victims of patriarchy actually reinforces patriarchy.

Patriarchy and other consequences of class hierarchy are defeated by the contradictions that they create in society. A man who devotes himself to the abolition of male dominant society is the embodiment of such a contradiction. That's what we are, don't over think it. Just roll up our sleeves, listen and take good notes, offer to help organize and always center the voices and experiences of the victims of patriarchy.

[–] Swagdorf@aussie.zone 1 points 15 hours ago

100% I'm a feminist in the original sense of the term, and not the radical (misandrist) way it's come to be recognised as. As a man I don't pretend to 100% relate to the BS women have to put up with on the regular, but I can listen, I can empathise, and I can recognise it stems from a society in which men are viewed as "superior" for some reason.

Similarly, I recognise a lot of issues men have also stems from our patriarchal society. For me it's not about quantifying the harm (although if I had to, hot take but on average I'd say the people not in power have it worse), but about pointing to a problem and saying "This is stupid and causing a lot of harm to everyone, why keep it?"

[–] Wahots@pawb.social 3 points 17 hours ago

Probably more egalitarian than feminist, just because of the bad branding over the years. Same principles still apply, though. Equal rights, equal pay, full maternity/paternity leave, equal draft laws, equal dress/beachwear, etc.

Having differences between genders has always rubbed me the wrong way. People are just people.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 7 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

I prefer the term "egalitarian". Functionally the same, but firmly places the focus on equality regardless of gender, and creates distance from the toxic misandrists who have tried to co-opt the "feminist" label.

[–] HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world 5 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

Most feminists I've talked to about it say they hate people who describe themselves as "egalitarian," essentially equating it to the "enlightened centrist" meme.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

And I hate the misandrists who describe themselves as "feminists", equating it with the "red pill" guys who turned a metaphor for radical systemic awareness into misogyny.

[–] HCSOThrowaway@lemmy.world 2 points 21 hours ago

True, but they seem to dominate every feminist space I've been in, so the definition of "feminist" is hard for me to work out; nicer people seem to think it's 1:1 with "egalitarian," but then why have two words for the same thing?

So my conclusion has been that I'll just keep voting and speaking in the interests of making our world treat men and women equally, and just shrug my shoulders at the labels. As I said elsewhere, that's not enough for some feminists, so they'll just have to continue disliking me. Misogynists dislike me too, so I'm used to it.

[–] pieberry@lemmy.today 10 points 1 day ago

I understand what you are saying, but you don't need a lived female experience to be a feminist.

I will declare you one. You are a feminist. Be proud.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, I'm a cis man and I am a Marxist feminist. Feminism is not exclusionary to cis men, and Marxist feminism is critical as patriarchy is a secondary contradiction that rests upon the primary contradiction of class society. Attacking sexism attacks capitalism, and attacking capitalism attacks sexism. They are connected.

[–] Icytrees@sh.itjust.works 5 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

Thanks for saying this. There was a rather popular unpopular opinion a while ago about how the only struggle should be the class struggle, and feminism was getting in the way. People need to see that they're both part of the same fight.

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 4 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Highly recommend reading Domenico Losurdo - Class struggle for more on this.

It gets into how there's not just a single class struggle, i.e. working class versus bourgeoisie, but many different and related class struggles. Both Marx and Engels held this multivariate view of class struggle too, and it was only later that chauvinists, anti-feminists, and imperialists restricted its meaning to the workplace only.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 8 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

That is a vulgar materialist conception, from those who do not grasp dialectical materialism, as well as those who reject it deliberately. Class reductionism doesn't recognize secondary contradictions that rest upon the base of primary contradictions, seeing each as separate and butchering how contradiction actually works as an engine of change in dialectics.

[–] Fierro@piefed.social 1 points 15 hours ago

I wouldn't, but some definitions I've heard fit me, I personally just call it basic decency + common sense

[–] Sordid_Seraphim@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 day ago

Maybe but if you forced my hand yes. The following is just my own viewpoint of feminism I have basically never interacted with literature or the community. (Yes I know I need to!)

I believe feminism is more than women's right. It's inherently the rights of everyone. The focus on feminimity I would say is because it's the largest oppressed class under patriarchy.

Women's rights are linked with trans rights because you must be able to accept the rights of whether or not someone identifies as a woman, a man, enby, or any other type of identity.

It links with men's rights because not only do men have privelage they also lack freedom of expression which also interlinks with trans rights. Men have privelage but they have also lost the right to decide the kind of man they want to be that doesn't follow within the narrow perspective of what society expects. That's harmful to both men and women.

Following in line with the last 2 it links with race because men, women, and trans people are a part of racial minorities. Inherently by treating anyone of a racial minority different you are trampling one someone's rights be they man, woman, or trans person.

That:'s just big topics without getting into parental rights, the rights of people with disabilities, immigrants, etc.

Following the you don't necessarily need to know a woman's experience to be able to acknowledge it's validity.

More than anything I think to strive for equality for everyone is feminist AF. I might be diluting what feminism is though.

[–] TVA@thebrainbin.org 30 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Yes, absolutely.

You don't have to understand a woman's experience so much as you have to not be a dick when she tells you her experience.

Look at all the men that got butthurt over "bear vs rando man" and I'm gonna be honest, I'd choose the bear over many of them too. They refused to listen to what was actually being said by that statement.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Rawrosaurus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Of course I would and I do. I find the arguments that there are many branches of feminism to be a reason to not consider yourself a feminist to be kind of ridiculous. There are multiple branches of everything. Not all anarchists agree, not all socialists agree, not all communists agree. No group is a monolith with perfectly aligned values and thoughts.

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί