Feminism in dating (Updated)

[Shining One]

"Feminism" = "the belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes"

I take it that dating would fall under the social aspect.

 

I've dated and am friends with several women who believe in equality when it comes to dating. They are harder to find, but they are certainly out there. Of course, they expect equality as well, so you should be prepared to deliver on your end.

[Woggle]

"Feminism" = "the belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes"

 

"Feminist" = "a person [i.e., male OR female] who believes in feminism

 

 

Hence, my previous allusion to the fact that the term gets "bastardized".

 

There are some modern feminists who get very angry when men call themselves feminists. If you don't believe me look it up.

[RedRobin]

 

This is an unpopular concept here, but romantic/sexual preferences are not intended to be treated the same as legal/employment rights.

 

 

I don't know how popular it is or isn't. Me personally, I strive to be a fully integrated person in both my professional and personal life.

 

 

Of course, I don't think I need to date someone old enough to be my dad to be considered 'fair'... but I should be able to pose an argument about how large gap relationships aren't a good idea without my gender being called into question.... for instance. Or have to hear the tired argument over and over about 'biology' and all that.

 

 

Same thing with the paying... men complain about having to pay. I don't think it is fair for women to expect men to pay. Doesn't mean individuals can't find someone who suits their particular preferences... but if we are talking about gender equality, then yea... it shouldn't be expected that the guy pays. That's all.

 

 

If you happen to be woman who prefers a guy to pay, then fine. But please don't say "women need X and Y". Say instead, "I need X and Y", and leave the gender stuff out of it. It's not that hard.

[mrldii]

There are some modern feminists who get very angry when men call themselves feminists. If you don't believe me look it up.

 

Thank you for re-proving my point that many people "bastardize" the term.

 

I do not doubt that there are women who "get very angry when men call themselves feminists", just as I do not doubt there are many men (and as we've now seen, women, too) who will vehemently deny they are "a feminist" and will instead clarify that they simply believe in the "social, political, and economic equality of the sexes".

[Woggle]

If you want traditional roles then fine but don't complain when it is expected of you either.

 

If you are a man who wants a stay at home wife who does the domestic things don't complain when she wants a provider and a strong alpha male.

 

If you are a woman who wants a man to always pay or wants a strong and masculine man don't get mad when he wants a demure woman who does the domestic or has a low partner count.

 

Be willing to give what you demand of others.

[Woggle]

Thank you for re-proving my point that many people "bastardize" the term.

 

I do not doubt that there are women who "get very angry when men call themselves feminists", just as I do not doubt there are many men (and as we've now seen, women, too) who will vehemently deny they are "a feminist" and will instead clarify that they simply believe in the "social, political, and economic equality of the sexes".

 

True but just like with many other movements the extremists control the narrative.

[mrldii]

I take it that dating would fall under the social aspect.

 

I've dated and am friends with several women who believe in equality when it comes to dating. They are harder to find, but they are certainly out there. Of course, they expect equality as well, so you should be prepared to deliver on your end.

 

 

"Bastardize" the term. Any person who does believe in "feminism" and then excludes paying their fair share in life, who calls women who sleep with [too many] men a derogatory term while calling men who sleep with [too many] women a *complimentary* term, and/or any of the other 1,000,001 ways to socially set different standards from one gender to another

 

is "bastardizing" the terms "feminism" and "feminist".

 

 

Again and still (and thanks to everyone for continuing to provide the proof, in *real* time), it is impossible to have a coherent conversation on any topic which includes the oft-bastardized term "feminism" within its premise.

[mrldii]

True but just like with many other movements the extremists control the narrative.

 

Only when the listener let them and refuse to hear the ones who do use the terms correctly, as indicated by their actions

 

and, instead, allow the exceptions to [appear to] be[come] The Rule.

 

 

I don't allow others' bastardizations of terms and ideals rewrite the definitions nor control the dialogue; if others want to and allow it, that's on them.

[mike_89]

I don't allow others' bastardizations of terms and ideals rewrite the definitions nor control the dialogue; if others want to and allow it, that's on them.

You too are bastardizing the term though, by omitting an essential part of the definition of feminism.

 

Feminism as defined by Cambridge:

 

"the ​belief that women should be ​allowed the same ​rights, ​power, and ​opportunities as men and be ​treated in the same way, or the set of ​activities ​intended to ​achieve this ​state:"

 

and Oxford:

 

"The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes."

 

Your definition omits the "women's rights" part that is essential to the definition of feminism. Wanting gender equality does not make one a feminist, advocating or believing in women's rights on the basis of the idea of gender equality does.

[mrldii]

You too are bastardizing the term though, by omitting an essential part of the definition of feminism.

 

Feminism as defined by Cambridge:

 

"the ​belief that women should be ​allowed the same ​rights, ​power, and ​opportunities as men and be ​treated in the same way, or the set of ​activities ​intended to ​achieve this ​state:"

 

and Oxford:

 

"The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes."

 

Your definition omits the "women's rights" part that is essential to the definition of feminism. Wanting gender equality does not make one a feminist, advocating or believing in women's rights on the basis of the idea of gender equality does.

 

While flattered to be mistaken for Mr. Merriam and/or Mr. Webster, "[my] definition is not mine; it's the Merriam-Webster Dictionary's definition...and the first one that pops up in a Google search for a definition of the word.

 

No doubt someone could go to the Urban Dictionary and find a definition less-bastardized to suit their agenda when discussing "Feminism in Dating".

 

In any event, OP's question was handily answered in Post #14 of this thread.

[Woggle]

Wasn't the personal is political a favorite phrase of feminists back in the day?

[mrldii]

Wasn't the personal is political a favorite phrase of feminists back in the day?

 

Must be waaaaaay back in a day, as in my 55 years on this planet, I've never heard it.

 

Or, just didn't pay attention, 'cuz again, I don't let radicals define the dialogue.

[Woggle]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjzo_DwnsjJAhWDOj4KHTqnBP0QFggdMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FThe_personal_is_political&usg=AFQjCNFfG2aKrYo5I7SxG8fqbMWySwOXUg&sig2=WAemavnOU0danU5fZx4AJQ

[mike_89]

While flattered to be mistaken for Mr. Merriam and/or Mr. Webster, "[my] definition is not mine; it's the Merriam-Webster Dictionary's definition...and the first one that pops up in a Google search for a definition of the word.

 

No doubt someone could go to the Urban Dictionary and find a definition less-bastardized to suit their agenda when discussing "Feminism in Dating".

 

In any event, OP's question was handily answered in Post #14 of this thread.

Well in that case you should include the full definition they give, not half of it.

 

Full Definition of feminism

1

: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2

: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

[mrldii]

Well in that case you should include the full definition they give, not half of it.

 

Full Definition of feminism

1

: the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes

2

: organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

 

Aside from the obvious, is there some reason you're taking special exception to [what you claim to be "my" bastardized] definition of "feminism" and no one else's..to which they've not bothered to provide citations to, but it's what they've decided it means?

 

And, aside from the obvious, is there some reason you've yet to address the original topic of this thread, or the handily-explained answer to the OP's question, in Post #14?

 

In any event, until a provocative response to THAT answer (as found in Post #14) is made, this thread is pretty much done, as the original question has been answered...and it was answered after my original post IN the thread, to which you continue to take exception.

[basil67]

Does anyone have any thoughts on why dating seems to be rather almost immune to feminism? I know women aren't quite equal yet to men in things like salary and career opportunities. But they're certainly closing the gap rapidly. This is not really the case in dating though. Does anyone ever see this changing?

 

No, I don't see it changing anytime soon. When I read of men who judge a woman as being 'not marriage material' because she has the same sexual values as a man I completely despair.

 

I wonder if the guys who object to paying are the same ones who reject a girl because her sexual values are the same as his.

[Woggle]

No, I don't see it changing anytime soon. When I read of men who judge a woman as being 'not marriage material' because she has the same sexual values as a man I completely despair.

 

I wonder if the guys who object to paying are the same ones who reject a girl because her sexual values are the same as his.

 

The better is why don't women reject men who have these sexual values? They can do themselves a lot of favors by not falling for these type of men.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Woggle

[Els]

If you happen to be woman who prefers a guy to pay, then fine. But please don't say "women need X and Y". Say instead, "I need X and Y", and leave the gender stuff out of it. It's not that hard.

 

I don't necessarily agree with the rest of your post, but I agree completely with this bit.

 

If you want traditional roles then fine but don't complain when it is expected of you either.

 

I agree. TBH I've seen this hypocrisy more often from men than from women on LS - there were several men who were against paying for dates but call women with multiple previous partners all manner of derogatory terms while having had even more previous partners themselves. Men who were all up in arms about their wife not wanting to change her name to theirs while expecting a driven and ambitious career woman. Men who expected the wife to pay 50% of expenses while being the primary childcarer. Goes on and on.

 

Personally I think that most reasonable people with reasonable partners just end up finding a relatively balanced groove that works for them and makes them happy, and that's really what matters. IMO in happy Rs there is very little 'expecting' going on and a lot of 'I want to make him/her happy' going on, so a natural balance can be found in whichever manner the couple prefers.

[shoplocal]

I took that as you giving her a compliment! You weren't?? :confused:

 

HAH :-p No, I was simply stating a fact.

[shoplocal]

ok. whatever. It seems the only people who are interested in these titles are people who don't believe in equal treatment and fairness for both genders.

 

 

So, how about I have a label for THOSE people instead? I call them fundamentalists. Since their gender beliefs tend to go along traditional, religion based teaching.

 

 

Are you a fundamentalist? And how do you apply your fundamentalist teachings to dating? I mean, if you are a man, and you are ok with having to pay, then you have to be ok for other thngs... like being ok to wait for marriage for sex, etc. I see a lot of hypocrisy on both sides when it comes to their so-called preferences. I don't like hypocrisy.

 

 

Maybe I am an anti-hypocrite. How about that?

 

In the off chance you're asking me personally if I am a fundamentalist based on your definition of the word, I think it's a silly question and won't answer it.

 

As for gender equality in dating -- I wish there were more of it. I think many people would like this. But realistically, the desire to be intimate with another person is strong enough that it overrides conscious and moral perspectives. If there aren't prospective partners with ideal beliefs, most people will compromise and work with what they can find.

[loveflower]

Alright I tell you one thing, then you can tell me what I should think of the so-called feminism.

 

In the gym, average size guys can easily do weight 10 times than me. so, am I expect to do the same things as men?

[mrldii]

Alright I tell you one thing, then you can tell me what I should think of the so-called feminism.

 

In the gym, average size guys can easily do weight 10 times than me. so, am I expect to do the same things as men?

 

I dunno...but, I'll be able to answer that, after you fill in this missing piece to the equation:

 

 

of these average-sized guys who "easily do weight 10 times than [you]",

 

how many have given birth in 1/10th the time of the average-sized women?

 

 

 

Oh, wait...I can answer your question, without that missing data:

 

"equality" [in the context of "feminism"] does not mean "sameness".

 

 

 

"Equality" [in the context of "feminism"] does not mean men and women should have the same-sized boobs, nor have the same-sized penises AND vaginas and all become hermaphrodites.

 

[Wewon]

If you want traditional roles then fine but don't complain when it is expected of you either.

 

If you are a man who wants a stay at home wife who does the domestic things don't complain when she wants a provider and a strong alpha male.

 

If you are a woman who wants a man to always pay or wants a strong and masculine man don't get mad when he wants a demure woman who does the domestic or has a low partner count.

 

Be willing to give what you demand of others.

 

 

I agree with this. I've always said most men will dance to whatever tune you give them, but it has to be consistent.

 

I've only been here for a little while, but I've seen the same discussion on other message boards.

 

I've never known a man under 60 that has had a genuine problem with a woman in terms of her career and legal standing. Most of the frustration comes on the domestic/social front when picking and choosing becomes more arbitrary and confusing.

 

Most guys have been whipsawed with being told that traditional courtship traditions are a must, but "This isn't the 1950s" when the issue of who will cook comes up. Housework is divided 50-50 but "You're the man" when it comes to mowing the lawn.

[Rejected Rosebud]

 

Most guys have been whipsawed with being told that traditional courtship traditions are a must, but "This isn't the 1950s" when the issue of who will cook comes up. Housework is divided 50-50 but "You're the man" when it comes to mowing the lawn.

That is a copout. Nobody's "whipsawed" unless they volunteer to be. Any man who doesn't want to traditionally court SHOULD NOT DO IT. They are being cowardly and untrue to themselves if they go ahead and do it because society expects it of them (or, as is often the case, because they think it's going to help them get sex). Live your own beliefs.

 

In good relationships, some things ARE 50/50 and other things ARE delegated to one or the other partner; if some or most of them happen to fall in line with traditional gender roles - like guy mowing the lawn - that's just fine. Unless the man happens to feel very resentful about lawn mowing.

[Wewon]

That is a copout. Nobody's "whipsawed" unless they volunteer to be. Any man who doesn't want to traditionally court SHOULD NOT DO IT. They are being cowardly and untrue to themselves if they go ahead and do it because society expects it of them (or, as is often the case, because they think it's going to help them get sex). Live your own beliefs.

 

In good relationships, some things ARE 50/50 and other things ARE delegated to one or the other partner; if some or most of them happen to fall in line with traditional gender roles - like guy mowing the lawn - that's just fine. Unless the man happens to feel very resentful about lawn mowing.

 

Not a cop-out, its a genuine experience. And who says these guys aren't walking away from that kind of foolishness? I sure didn't. But I can guarantee you that this is an experience that many men are running into a lot, the picking and choosing of equality based on the phase of the moon, zodiac horoscopes or sun-spots.

 

As far as what a "good relationship" is, that's up to the people involved and NOONE else. The best way to poison a relationship is to have a 3rd party tell you when something is 50-50.