[crassus]

When I think of feminists, I think of such leading lights of the movement as Adria Richards and Shanely:

https://twitter.com/shanley/status/460472595968569345

Feminists are radical activists, feminism is not about equality, and although everybody deserves respect and consideration as an individual, men and women are not equal and no amount of belief will change that scientific fact.

[teacup50]

I can't tell if "leading lights" is meant earnestly here, but I personally choose to believe she's anything but:

"Lol men are all like WHY DO WOMEN NEED SPECIAL PLACES TO HACK. well, maybe it's because men are RAPISTS."

https://twitter.com/shanley/status/451779905475186690

[joshlegs]

I dont understand why you're being downvoted for quoting from the chick's twitter where she accuses all men of one of the most heinous crimes one can commit. She doesnt sound like a champion of gender equality to me, based on this absurd tweet.

maybe it's satire. i'll try to give her the benefit of the doubt.

[benjamincburns]

I hear "separate but equal" was all the rage back in the 50's and 60's... I wonder how that turned out.

[deveac]

>feminism is not about equality

You could not be more incorrect.

Equality is the very core of feminism. It is, in fact, the dictionary definition of it:

>1. : the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism

>men and women are not equal and no amount of belief will change that scientific fact.

Equality used in the context of gender studies generally means "equal and fair treatment". I know people like to split hairs with their definitions for the sake of argument, so maybe you can elaborate on why you think that women are not equal to men and never will be, what the science says on that, and how any of that applies to not treating both men and women fairly (read: equally).

[theorique]

Feminism was originally about equality (e.g. suffragettes for voting law, domestic violence law) but it has exceeded its mandate long ago and become primarily a tool to secure legal advantages for women.

A true "humanism" or "equalism" would seem to keep things fair for both men and women.

[deveac]

>Feminism was originally about equality (e.g. suffragettes for voting law, domestic violence law) but it has exceeded its mandate long ago and become primarily a tool to secure legal advantages for women.

Again, that is not what feminism is or means. That's more of a re-definition of the word to support a personal assertion.

>A true "humanism" or "equalism" would seem to keep things fair for both men and women.

You're absolutely right here. This is why you see fewer and fewer colleges offering classes in 'feminism' anymore. Of course, the classes are still being offered and the content is the same, but the programs are now called 'Gender Studies' increasingly, to reflect the very notion you are describing.

A close friend of mine is a got her PhD from Rutgers and has taught gender studies at a variety of universities over the decades. Looking at the entire body of feminist philosophy and output over the years, a central truth that her work and the work of many of her peers seems to reveal in talking with them over the years is that when you abstract their philosophy to its very core, all that you are left with is equality. And it goes beyond equality for both men and women as you say, but for all genders and eccentricities as well. If I had a dollar for each time I've heard a feminist talk about how there was not much difference between their discipline and say, African American studies, or Native American studies I'd be rich, because at the core of each of these disciplines is a quest for tolerance and equity.

But wrapped around this core is the study of the history of the treatment of these classes over time. There are attempts to measure the degree to which equality was present. And based off of that, there is activism to achieve equality where common sense and/or measured study revealed it to be lacking.

It is this last part, the action or activism that gives people the most problems I think. The setting out to 'set things right'. It is here that tempers flare, lines are crossed, and toes get stepped on. Here is where people disagree where the lines should be, and here is where some people make the claim that feminism has gone too far and isn't about equality but actually about grabbing special treatment and privilege. They've achieved equality in their past efforts and now they want more than that.

I get why people feel that way. The activism is the hardest because society doesn't agree on what victory through equality looks like. You see it with women's rights, minority rights, and religious rights every single day in my country.

But any feminist who deserves the name will tell you that it's a big umbrella, and activism is only one part of it, and it is really the result of the study of gender and it affects people's place in our society. Make no mistake, -feminism IS about equality, both by definition of the word and in practice in the field of study when you look at it as a whole. Don't get too hung up on its application by some actors under a large umbrella. Most feminists I know would be right on board with your definition of humanism and equalism, again, it's the very reason the names of the programs have been changing over time.

[antihero]

Oh look, you are another one of those ignorant people who treats feminism as a whole because it suits them. I know a fair few people who fight for "equality" and condemned of Adria Richards being a colossal jerk.

[FireBeyond]

Food for thought - this article is discussing JAH and GitHub. Over the last few weeks, JAH has repeatedly quoted this person. Maybe that has some relevance.