the official definition of antifeminism

Started by hansside, Jun 04, 2006, 07:06 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down


"The official definition of antifeminism is this:

Noun 1. antifeminism - activity indicative of belief in the superiority of men over women
male chauvinism, chauvinism
sexism - discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of the opposite sex "

The real definition of antifeminism is:

Noun 1. antifeminism - activity indicative of disbelief in the superiority of women over men, opposition to female chauvinism, opposition to chauvinism, opposition to sexism, and opposition to discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of the one's own or the opposite sex "

Rather the different meaning than what feminists lkike to THINK anti-feminism means.

I do see Dr. E's point in how the term, at this stage in the game, could do more harm than good. Methinks "Anti-SEXISM"* seems to be the most accurate description for my beliefs and may fit what others here think as well.

*Since this the core of what its about. I don't advocate sexism towards either gender. (Disclaimer: I do sometimes make comments that may SOUND sexist or anti-female; but the reality is these comments are directed at the way women have embraced  the "anything goes if you're a woman; women great/men pigs; I'm a strong and indepenendet woman (as long as the gov't gives me special powers and pays the bills); you men are responsible for yourselves AND me, I am accountable for nothing" mentality of female sexism/chauvinism/misandry. Or to put it another way, I DO reject those women who have chosen this path, but I likewise acknowledge that a FEW women have not gone down that path and that therefore the female of the species IS quite capable of being fiar, just, reasonable, responsible, and pleasant. My gripe is with sexist, selfish, and stupid women, not with women collectively- I'd just like to see the balance between the two shift.


We've hit upon similar discussion on my forum too, and I'm somewhat in agreement with Dr Evil on this point.

-=the full thread=-

Quote from: "Karl"
What i was saying is that i've got around to also trying to reword the term 'antifeminist'. People equate 'feminism' with 'women', a stereotype, of sorts. When they hear "I'm an anti-feminist." they instinctively assume you're against not just feminism - but women too. Many, like I too was once guilty of, believe quite truly that feminism is for equality, and hence if you're against feminism - you're against equality for women.


So with this in mind, i coined my own term:


For most people, this will initiate a quiet tick-over of curiosity. This will give you the option to explain the position and how it is also beneficial for children & women, not just men.
For those who know the term - or a rough idea - they may well think "anti-male, ahh - such as family courts, the media..etc." rather than "hmm he hates women, eh! tsk - shame on you!", both of which are true. Again, it offers the opportunity to explain further.
ny man living in this feminized world has got to be tough to tolerate it.

>> <<


Quote from: "Darth Sidious"
How so?  Correct me if I err, but the reason you advocate us not identifying ourselves as anti-feminists is because of how feminists have defined the word.  Undoubtedly, you understand the general public has been largely indoctrinated by feminism and its attitudes.

That is the point. Calling ourselves anti-feminists is like calling ourselves Satanists. It will immediately be misconstrued. Calling ourselves masculinists has nearly the same affect. It would be better to use the term humanist as Dr. Evil suggested a while ago since it is both neutral and largely unfamiliar to most people. That would invite people to ask what we mean by "humanist" and more importantly allow us to define it. Trying to redefine anti-feminist only wastes valuable time and effort because people have spent thirty years having it defined as against equality for women.


We live in a world of word-twisting. We could call ourselves the 'Egalitarian Movement' and it would still be rubbished by powerful media interests.
Old story: In my former government service in the UK I had to sign a form every year swearing that I was not a member of 'The Freemasons' - an all-male organisation. I was not, but what if I lied? Would it have meant expulsion and forfeiture of pension rights? In the space provided I always wrote, "I am a member of Lesbian Sisters for World Domination". I guess they just filed it under 'crackpot', and left me alone.
What's in a name unless you're actually running for office?
Feminism is deeply entrenched and this is no time for theatrical heroics. Guerrilla warfare is the name of the game.
If some want to hoist their standard and be shot down we will accord them due respect in the History books. They will be classed as heros.
Contrary to Hollywood opinion, wars are not won by heros; They are won by people who think smarter than their opponents.

Choose a name and play with it. It's what we do that counts.
'm an asylum seeker. Don't send me back.


I agree witth Malakas.
Even if a group of men don't associate with the word anti-feminist or misogyny don't mean the group wouldn't be labeled anyway.
It's the same message.
If Nazis were called pranksters they would still be considered bad for the activities and the goals they elect.

Like the partisans we must build our resistance and hit the enemy where it hurts every chance we get.  
Men didn't ask for a war of the sexes and in fact did everything to appease the opposite sex which only worked in the favor of those who who chose to wage war.

We must declare a war of Attrition on Politicians, the media, the Lawyers,  Judges and damn anyone who gets in the way.
It's time men end this slavery and put some sanity back in the world.
It takes time to persuade men to do even what is for their own good.
~Thomas Jefferson

Men don't need women to fulfill themselves spiritually. They only need them to realize they don't need them.
~Henry Makow


Quote from: "Sir Percy"

Bugger what Feminist SAY they want, look at what they FORCE. Look at what they TAKE.

Exactly. Any social movements should be judged by what it actually does - NEVER by what is says it does.

All movements, of course, say they do good, and probably believe it to.

Sometimes the road to hell really is paved with good intentions.

Go Up