Unpopular Opinion

I mean this comes off as why isn’t there a C for Cis or S for Straight in LGBTQ+? Shouldn’t they represent all genders/sexual expression? Isn’t it about equality and rights for all genders?! To be clear, I find that stance ridiculous.

Just because straight people are left out of the movement’s title doesn’t mean LGBTQ+ theory is advocating for superiority over straight/cis people, which is kind of your unspoken argument here for the “poor branding” of feminism.

And if you’re looking for the overarching term for all of this. It’s Gender Studies or Gender Equality. Always has been.

Feminism is a field of study not just a movement and it has vastly different interpretations. Liberal feminism and radical feminism are perhaps the most visible and mainstream but that doesn’t come close to all of feminism theory out there.

Feminism is very much meant to be, a criticism of, and in opposition to the patriarchy or male dominated social structures. Hence why “fem” is frontline and center. While cis-men are victims of the patriarchy in nuanced ways they are not its primary victims, and certainly not victims to the same degree as women and LGBTQ+ individuals. And pretending they are to onboard allies is a bit of a slap in the face and a watering down of feminism itself.

This has "all lives matter" feels

I think the word for that is gender egalitarism or gender equality. And depending on how you define Feminism, feminism is just a part of that. Or maybe not if you define it another way. Feminism has had several waves and comes in different forms, so the entire term is vague.

I think it kind of depends what you're trying to convey. If you're talking to a feminist and aren't aware modern societies are patriarchal, and now badly this needs to be addressed... but you start an uneducated conversation on equality and how men need to be factored in, too... You might be technically correct, but you're not going to make friends. That's kind of dismissive of what they focus on, and showing you're not really equipped to recognize the issues they might face.

And the difference in my definition would be mainly focus. Feminism might be part of gender egalitarianism for most people. It's just the part that necessarily advocates for just treatment of women. Everything else might come on top, fighting for other people too, or hating them... That's just beyond the definition.

I played a game called "smear the queer" as a closeted gay teen. When the LGBTQ+ community took the word 'queer' back, I resisted. It brought up terrible feelings in me. Turns out I had to do some inner work to heal what the world told me to believe about my own people. There was no other way I could be a proud gay man if I refused the label that gave our community our power back. If you want a word that feels better than 'feminism,' you'll find endless external validation online. If you want to feel proud of being a man or worthy of the woman you marry, you'll have to drown out that noise and look inward.

I agree; Feminism strives to be egalitarianism. It's inherently a misnomer in that it (the movement) strives to benefit more than women while only being named for women.

And to be clear, feminism is great. It's just a peculiar name given its actual tennets.

I completely agree: the name has been compromised. Haters have successfully turned it into something negative. Perhaps it will get the respect it’s due if it can leave some baggage behind.

I was one of many who fell for the propaganda about feminists being man haters and wanting superiority, and I’m sure some do. However most women I know who claim to be feminists are so in the egalitarian sense. They just want equal rights and opportunity. My own eye opening was when we had our first kid. At the time my company had no paternity leave. It was a group of feminists at work who raised a stink (unasked) to try to get that changed, that men also deserve some time off for the birth of their child

I don’t like the name of your movement, so you should rename it for me

-The most “man” take you can have

I always thought the expansion of feminism was called Intersectionality.

If you disagree with op, how about you actually engage in the debate instead of resorting to ad hominems?

Way to all lives matter equality there buddy

This is part of why I refuse the label Feminist and go with Egalitarian. That and it's a degree of separation from TERFs, who sadly seem like the norm, not the exception, when it comes to Feminist movements

I think before we play word games, we need to revolutionize the societal belief that men are in control and at the top.

There is a 'patriarchy' every bit as much as there is a 'matriarchy' if you follow me.

I actually believe, very sincerely, that women drive most of the social dynamics and mostly define gender roles. I genuinely feel that women have more power than men, in most areas of life.

It's a sensitive topic to bring up, because it runs counter to the narrative, but there's something that doesn't get looked at, and until fair acknowledgment of that occurs, we can't really move forward into an equal society.

What does feminism in the West mean today though? I understand women have gone from witches to be burned at the stake to second class citizens but today everyone's equally a wage slave! Are there still any legal differences that benefit men unfairly? The name should follow the function so maybe feminism, if it's more about "female supremacy" (I also don't know what you could do in that direction besides mess with divorce laws either, maybe give them all some tren shots so they can beat their bfs up, lol, but I'm just following the argument), should keep its name?

How about "Womanizing?" Everyone pro-woman is a "womanizer."

No, it should still be called feminism. That's what it is. It's an ideology with a ton of different variants/branches, with the most 'generic' sort of definition, from dictionary.com, being the advocacy of women's rights on the basis of the equality of the sexes. Feminism has always been about this, hence the advocacy in favour of equity in areas where women are under-represented, but no advocacy for non-women in areas where women are 'ahead'. Sorta like how left leaning sorts point to a theory of equity that values the equality of outcomes to justify things like DEI -- but if anyone points out that the aggregate 'outcome' from our healthcare approach results in women living ~5 years longer than men on average, meaning an 'equality of outcomes' approach should preference men's health care needs until that gap is closed, suddenly they'll have excuses why their vision of equity exempts that particular case.

There's no real reason to change the term feminism, it fits with what feminist ideals generally are and has a valid place as a general ideology. It's especially pertinent in areas where women's rights are massively under-represented / ignored.

Equality of all people is egalitarianism. It's been around for longer than feminism, in general. Feminists are not egalitarian, as they aren't about equality of all people, and instead only focus on a specific niche, and ultimately are ok if their niche is preferenced / comes out on top. Both ideologies can exist just fine. What needs to change is your perspective of what feminism is, as you seem to mistakenly think its about equality for everyone.

Call it whatever ya like. Just keep it to your circles. That shit gets no play in public. Not IRL.

something something, coming from incels and mysogyny. they think its a counterpart to toxic and hypermasculinity its not even the same thing.