Can someone be a feminist AND believe in and support men's rights and equality for men?

Question

Why or why not?

Answer 1

I believe in feminism and believe in supporting men's rights-but I think I've supported many causes that affect men that I notice don't seem to matter to many men's groups. I"ve always supported g*y and L*****n groups - as have the majority of 3rd wave feminist groups-but I don't see a lot of support among men's rights groups for g*y men. Actually I see quite a bit of homophobia-which is pretty ironic-when I would think one of the priorites of men's rights groups would be the rights of g*y men-who can still be fired-just for being g*y. Feminists go to g*y pride events-where are the men's groups?

I think that's pretty hypocritical-but I know the second wave of feminism had a lot of homophobia that they were able to overcome. Hopefully the men's rights movement will be able to evolve past the primary concerns of the rights of heterosexual men and will be able to fight for the rights of all men-straight and g*y.

I've also supported the rights of boys and girls to grow up safely. I've been concerned about the exploitation of both boys and girls and the abuse and rape of boys and girls-unlike some of my anti-feminist peers who mocked caring about the sexual exploitation of boys or men. Why aren't the men's groups involved in providing services for raped men or boys like feminists have been doing for men and boys and for women and girls?

I've been aware of g*y and L*****n battering and male battering a lot longer than the average American male or female and have always supported making services available for all types of families. But when I see discussions about battering I see men's groups focusing on shutting down women's battered shelters that also serve men-and they don't discuss the support of g*y men. Why aren't the men's groups focusing on helping g*y and straight men-instead of shutting down services?

I don't see why men's groups are fighting the support that feminists have been providing both men and women-instead why don't they join with feminists to also provide services for battered or raped adults or for g*y or L*****n adults? I see many issues that feminists and men's rights advocates could work on..

Answer 2

Can someone be a man and be a little pregnant? It's all or nothing, or so I've gathered from what I've read in this forum.

Answer 3

Yepper. I thinks so!

~Grits and Gravy's opinion does not reflect those of Fox news, or any other extreme right-wing affiliate. (C) 2008 GG

Answer 4

Yes, I consider myself a feminist and I still support men's rights.  I don't believe in alimony and I don't support laws that disenfranchise men.  I'm still not ashamed to call myself a feminist.  It just means I believe in equality.

Answer 5

a feminist wants to be equal not superior

Answer 6

I don't see why not. I'm anti-feminist and I support equal rights for women.

Edit

I should qualify my answer by saying that a genuine feminist (by the dictionary definition) would support equality for women, but the feminist movement has shown over and over that it is about promoting the rights of women and denigrating men. I think men and women should be equal, so I don't see a problem with an equality movement supporting both men and women.

Answer 7

Yes, they can and most do.

Answer 8

Yes, there is no reason why not. I am all for building bridges instead of burning them.

A lot of men support so-called women's issues, especially DV/rape prevention. A lot of men actually hold the belief that men and women are equal and should be treated as such.

Lately, I've looked at A LOT of men's/father's rights groups out there. Some of these groups want to see women's shelters shut down or file discrimination lawsuits against them. Some want to campaign to have VAWA done away with. I don't support that.

1) We need those DV shelters and services for women still!

2) VAWA and VOCA isn't even fully funded each year. Each year we have to campaign to keep current funding at the very least and prevent future cuts. If these acts are turned over...it's doubtful anything would replace them. That hurts everyone...men, women and children!

If they want more DV services, especially in the area of safe havens, it would better suit them to take a look at how women's shelter's came to be...through consciousness-raising and encouraging women to come forward. As more and more women stepped forward the need for shelters increased as well as the need for funding such programs. There is nothing that would prevent such groups from applying for the same type of funding/grants that women's shelters utilize. Also on this issue...I think gender neutrality when it comes to considering DV/rape could be a positive change in the right direction.

In terms of child custody...

-I agree that 50/50 is a good idea. I don't agree that it should be mandatory. It should be on a case-by-case basis because it's not always going to be what is best for the child. I think if a father geniunely wants to spend time with his kids and doesn't just want to be a weekend dad...more power to him. Not all fathers are interested in getting out of child support payments. Some think that if they are paying, they should be entitled to a fair amount of visitation with their child. It's a complicated issue, for sure.

-CPS reform...heck yes! Few people realize that each agency (county) gets paid when they foster/adopt a child who is a ward of the state out. This is information which is posted on their websites. I didn't believe this at first until I stumbled upon it looking for information on how to be considered a relative placement for my niece. I agree that keeping families together (especially when an abuse allegation is unfounded!) or at least placing the child(ren) with a relative, if possible needs to happen more. I was disgusted that I found more information on how to become a relative placement from a men's rights website then from the DHS website and talking to someone on the phone. That's sad.

That's all I can think of for now. ;)

Answer 9

Absolutely.  Men didn't lift a finger to protect the rights of boys being used as 14 hour a day hard labor in dangerous factories and mines.  FEMINISTS fought for the child labor laws that helped boys.  Men didn't lift a hand about domestic violence, which effects men, too.  FEMINISTS fought for domestic violence laws.  Domestic violence wasn't even an issue in all-male led society.  Men didn't lift a finger about the enormous human violation against men of not allowing them to vote but drafting them and sending them off to die in a war.  FEMINISTS, though, helped to make that human rights violation a public issue, and with men and women from many liberal / human right's protecting organizations got the voting age lowered.  Men as a voting block vote down every single measure that would help young boys have healthy childhoods, nutritonal programs, good schools, national child health insurance, quality early childhood education, etc.  They even go after weakening the mothers of little boys, voting down every single measure that could help her raise her sons.  And, dead-beat dads continue to be the number one violators of boy's human rights for a childhood free of poverty.  Feminists are by far the best chance boys have.  Men's rights groups couldn't care less about boys.  They just don't want to have to pay child support.  Feminists will plead for help and say, "Look.  The people suffering the most in public schools, the kids having the most difficulty are boys who live in poverty.  Let's find ways to reduce poverty in those boy's lives and help them rise. " Men's Rights guys, though, say,"Boys are doing badly in school because women teachers are favoring female students."  And, as a voting block, they continue to vote down every school tax increase, every measure known that effectively reduces poverty in a community, rage over affirmative action that effectively reduces poverty and measureably benefits boys growing up, and never offer a rational solution other than "women hate men" or only a blame that it's all mommy's fault.

Answer 10

Yes. Feminism has always been about helping everyone. If we look at the history of Feminism (at least in Canadian history), it's easy to see exactly what it was all about. I think today it has been distorted by many people - men and women, feminists and anti-feminists. But, once urbanization occured, women were indeed expected to work, just like men. Especially those women that were unmarried daughters. They didn't want to be a burden to their fathers. During the first and second world wars, women were forced into the factories in huge numbers - especially textile and agricultural factories. And, since their job in the home was sewing and caring for the home, it was considered fairly natural for them to take on textiles. However, since it was a "natural" gift, women weren't ever considered skilled workers. I mean, men working as tailors were considered skilled, while women working as tailoresses were not. They were paid according to what their bosses figured they were worth as "unskilled labour". When the men returned from war, they had no where to work, because women had taken over the factories. And, women couldn't go back home, because it was no longer finacially possible. Since there was more competition for work, men started to receive less pay. And, so starts the feminist revolution. If they didn't fight for rights for women, they wouldn't have received them themselves.

Answer 11

I would say yes but then if that's the case I'd say defining yourself as an egalitarian would be a more prudent choice since egalitarians believe in equality for all people.

Feminism, while in my opinion is mostly noble, is usually a group of women who seek to better the lives of women. That doesn't necessarily mean men's rights aren't important but the rights of women concern them first and foremost because they are women.

But then again there are MANY different feminist ideologies so you can't really point down what specific things a feminist believes unless you speak with them.

Answer 12

I would think that you were more of an egalitarian then.  Or maybe a humanitarian....I'm not sure. lol

Answer 13

Definition of Feminism :

"Of or relating to or advocating equal rights for women".

ANY gang that is going by this principle ("for women") CAN'T be for Men's rights and Equality for Men. If they did, they would be calling themselves "Equalists". Period.

Answer 14

Feminists do support men's rights and equality for men, even though that support doesn't usually involve agreeing that men should continue to behave just as they always have, women sort it out and men take the credit.

Nasty bad feminists.

Cheers :-)

Answer 15

Techincally yes because feminism started when females were 'less equal' than men. So in theory to support feminism is to support equality between both sexes. But of course their are those extremist people who believe that females are the superior s*x. So yes you can support men's rights as long as you support equality of both sexes.

Answer 16

Yes.  Wanting there to an opportunity for everyone to accomplish as much as the next person without putting artificial barriers in place is equitable for all.

Answer 17

yes, as a feminist you want equality - meaning equality relative to men. In supporting either s*x, you have not said that you believe one should be superior or dominant, just equal. Therefore, by supporting one s*x's equality, you are supporting both s*x's equality.

Sidenote, being a true feminist does not mean demanding dominance over males, or insisting that women are better than males. Feminists believe in that males and females should have equal rights.

Answer 18

No, as these ideologies are mutually exclusive.

Answer 19

It depends on the branch of feminism. All feminists aren't the same.

Answer 20

Yes. In fact, if someone doesn't support equality for men as well as women, they can't really call themselves a feminist.