Isn't this arguably...
... third wave feminism?
Posted Nov 10, 2010, 4:07 AM UTC
345
I can't offer my opinion on that without trodding on territory the moderators would find out of bounds.
1
Apparently the mod has never heard the term before - I think that you're safe :)
2
Third-Wave Feminists seem to have a more balanced view on men, fathers, and male sexuality than Second-Wave. Also more open to women doing such things as home-making if they so choose. But they still seem to want to preserve the countless lopsided advantages women enjoy in our modern-day society. Therefore they are not a true equality movement.
4
Nonsense! I consider myself a third-wave feminist and would happily eliminate gender if it weren't so maoist. They are false advantages anyway. Were it to be a truly level playing field the 'advantages' wouldn't be required.
3
Would you end Title IX in college athletics? Affirmative Action? The ten Federal agencies dedicated to women's health? (compared to 0 for men) How about VAWA (Violence Against Women Act)? Would you support requiring the father's consent if a pregnant woman desired an abortion?
See, I told you this discussion would overstep the bounds of the moderator's intentions.
3
First wave feminists agitated to get into male spheres.
Second wave feminists changed all the rules in male spaces to work for women while destroying 'da patriarchy' or basically destroying male spaces.
Third wave feminists want to rebuild and change men as a whole for the benefit of women. They don't want men creating a new male space but instead want to change men as a whole for the benefit of the new female space.
2
I'm not sure. Could you provide a definition of that term?
1
Third wave feminism is defined by looking for gender equality (rather than women are better than men, or men are better than women).
An example being that all the social supports that exist for single mothers should exist for single fathers too. Although they currently frequently don't.
-1
I suppose that is what I personally believe in. I do want to be careful labeling this subreddit, however, since "feminism" itself is an extremely loaded word, and I'm sure the people I've invited to r/menandwomen from the various corners of reddit all have widely differing definitions of it.
3
Well then maybe it's time to clear up the misconceptions. Only because calling third-wave feminism some form of "let's all be gender neutral and frolic together" does a bit of a disservice for those who came before.
0
I'm a little confused as to how you reached that conclusion. I am neither calling this subreddit third-wave feminism, nor am I suggesting that we must "be gender neutral" here (nor did I attempt to call third-wave feminism anything). Frolicking together? Sure. Why not? This is a board on the internet. There are plenty of other boards on the internet to discuss the impact of our feminist foremothers. This isn't it. This is the place for frolicking together, yes.
4
I like what you did there. You suggested that r/menandwomen is third wave feminism, you provided a definition of third-wave feminism that isn't consistent with the subreddit creator's vision of this subreddit (see here), then after the subreddit creator expressed their hesitancy at labeling it third-wave feminism, you criticized them because it turns out that third-wave feminism doesn't accurately describe this subreddit. You just argued against the validity of your own submission.
4
Isn't it also arguably repetitive, given that r/equality already exists? I don't know. But now I have yet another gender issues subreddit front-paged.
1
[deleted]
1
No. It's a roast beef sandwich. Get your facts straight.
Roast beef sandwich. Now there's something we can all agree on.
rassafrassin' vegans ...
i was lead to believe all were welcome here :(
;p