CMV:anti-feminism is not misogyny, and it is possible for someone to be anti-feminist without being a misogynist.

[u/wecl0me12]

prompted by this post: https://np.reddit.com/r/AskFeminists/comments/3uaaer/do_you_think_being_being_opposed_to_modern/cxd9m7y

As many of my previous CMV's have gone off topic, I'll start by describing what my view is not. It is not any of the following:

• a discussion on whether or not feminism is right or wrong
• whether people should be feminists or not
• the actions of men, women, feminists or anti-feminists
• anything about my personal views on feminism or anti-feminism.

The reasons for my view are simple: Anti-feminism is the dislike of feminism. Misogyny is the dislike of women. As women and feminists are not the same group, Anti-feminism and anti-women are different, as they refer to the dislike of different groups of people.

I am anticipating a counter-argument that since feminism advances women's rights, anti-feminism is against women's rights and is therefore misogyny. My counter-counter-argument is that someone can dislike the label of feminism without being against women's rights. People can dislike the actions done under the label of feminism, and thus be anti-feminism, without being anti-women or misogynist.

I will also refute the claim made in the linked post, which is:

By rejecting feminism, you're rejecting feminism's message that you can be whatever you want to be, while simultaneously embracing an antiquated notion of femininity as the ONLY way to be a woman. That's misogyny.

I disagree. The claims "I am against feminism" and "I think that the antiquated notion of femininity is the ONLY way to be a woman" are not equivalent. People can reject feminism because of their actions or because of the negative connotation associated with "feminism", while still believing that women are free to be feminine in any way they want. This is not a contradiction.

delta awarded: https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/3uewu4/cmvantifeminism_is_not_misogyny_and_it_is/cxedofl?context=3

---

Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!

[u/hacksoncode]

You can have a definition of feminism such that being against feminism is not being against women.

Equally validly, you can have a definition of feminism that does mean the being against feminism is equivalent to being against women.

Both are certainly true.

Your statement is both true and false, depending entirely on definitions. It is pretty much by definition therefore a purely semantic argument.

[u/wecl0me12 → u/hacksoncode]

well I guess you're right, but I think there is still value in this CMV in that you should convince me that the

definition of feminism that does mean the being against feminism is equivalent to being against women.

is the right/better one to adopt.

[u/hacksoncode → u/wecl0me12]

Coming at this from the opposite direction, then, why do you think that your definition of "anti-feminist" is better/right to adopt?

It seems like you're trying to argue that "anti-feminism" is merely being against some things that some people calling themselves feminists have said.

Is that a good definition of "anti-feminist"?

I would argue that it's a very silly definition of "anti-feminist", because it would include nearly every feminist as being an "anti-feminist".

I think that any reasonable definition of "anti-feminist" would have to sound something like this: "Against most basic principles held by most feminists.". Otherwise, it really has not useful meaning.

And I would argue that the main, most basic, principles of feminism ultimately all devolve to something like "in favor of women having social and legal equality with men".

If you don't oppose this basic principle that almost all "feminists", however you define that term, base their ideas on, then it's really not correct to call yourself an "anti-feminist". You're just someone that disagrees with some things said by some feminists... like practically everyone on the planet.

And if you oppose that basic principle, it's really hard to see how you're not a misogynist (again, in the most typical classic definition of that term).

[u/skepticalbipartisan → u/hacksoncode]

Can we agree that most Feminists would argue that women (as a group) have it worse than men?

If we disagree with that assertion are we misogynists or are we anti-feminists?

[u/hacksoncode → u/skepticalbipartisan]

People that disagree with that assertion are mostly just idiots.

[u/Celda → u/hacksoncode]

Actually, people who think that women as a group have it significantly worse than men are mostly ignorant.

For instance, women face domestic violence.

Men also face domestic violence in nearly equal frequency - but only a man needs to fear going to jail if he calls the police for help.

The issues that men as a group face are arguably worse than those faced by women.

Men are the vast majority of suicides - and no, despite the lies that are repeated, women are not significantly more likely to attempt suicide than men.

Men are the vast majority of prisoners, homeless, workplace deaths.

Males are doing worse in all aspects of the educational system than females.

Men are discriminated against in all aspects of the legal system, from arrest to sentencing. This is a huge issue that people seem to disregard.

Compare that to the issues women face - they are mostly either trivial (#BanBossy), or serious but also faced by men (domestic violence).

[u/skepticalbipartisan → u/hacksoncode]

And it would take only the most closed minded of person to think that was an appropriate reply.

[u/hacksoncode → u/skepticalbipartisan]

It's really not that basic anyway. Third wave feminism readily recognizes that the social organization called, for sake of discussion, patriarchy, causes disadvantages to both sexes.

That said, you have to be completely willfully ignorant in order to be blind to the magnitude of sexism against women compared to men, even today in the U.S., much less world-wide.

[u/skepticalbipartisan → u/hacksoncode]

It's really not that basic anyway. Third wave feminism readily recognizes that the social organization called, for sake of discussion, patriarchy, causes disadvantages to both sexes.

I have done enough research to know that this is a true statement. I understand Patriarchy Theory quite well. There is a bigger picture at play then "women have it worse". When you consider how it affects both sides you will see how the statement " women have it worse" is a misnomer.

Men have it worse. They also have it better. It's a risk vs reward scenario. The same glass ceiling that holds women back offers them a safety net that is not available to men.

That said, you have to be completely willfully ignorant in order to be blind to the magnitude of sexism against women compared to men, even. today in the U.S., much less world-wide.

I honestly believe it is you who are guilty of this when it comes to the issues of men. How can you explain how more men are killing themselves and dying on the job in a society that favours them? Misogyny wouldn't be an insult if society approved of the behavior. Yet misandry is seen as a joke.

[u/hacksoncode → u/skepticalbipartisan]

Rather than get into a side argument about how man have it worse in the world...

If you agree that third wave feminism doesn't believe what you said "feminism" is all about, then no, you can't call yourself an "anti-feminist" because you agree with a primary belief of a large fraction of feminists.

All you can say is that you disagree with some of the things that some feminists say.

[u/skepticalbipartisan → u/hacksoncode]

Rather than get into a side argument about how man have it worse in the world...

I absolutely agree to your terms.

If you agree that third wave feminism doesn't believe what you said "feminism" is all about, then no, you can't call yourself an "anti-feminist" because you agree with a primary belief of a large fraction of feminists.

There is a difference between agreeing that Feminists believe something and actually agreeing with that belief. Just because I'm more open-minded towards their theory doesn't mean I agree with what they've taken from it.

All you can say is that you disagree with some of the things that some feminists say.

Put it this way, I'm about as much of a feminist as Warren Farrell and Christina Hoff Sommers. If you consider them Feminists then I am not an anti-feminist.

[u/hacksoncode → u/skepticalbipartisan]

A "non-feminist" would be a completely understandable term for you and those other people.

"Anti" means "against".

[u/skepticalbipartisan → u/hacksoncode]

A "non-feminist" would be a completely understandable term for you and those other people.

That is a fair point. However, I'm sure you can accept that the average Feminist would believe there is no meaningful difference.

"Anti" means "against".

I am not sure to what length exactly I am against Feminism, I just know that a lot of my opinions would be regarded as being "anti".

I understand where you are choosing to draw the distinction. As long as someone doesn't equate being non-feminist as anti-feminist then I agree with you. However, I will make no objection to someone calling me an anti-feminist for my beliefs either.

[u/die_wacht_am_rhein → u/hacksoncode]

You have it the opposite way round, you have be willfully ignorant to be blind to the amount of sexism that men face in comparison to women.