上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 360

[–]IchBinGelangweilt 563ポイント564ポイント  (106子コメント)

I am kinda confused about it now

[–]stGrumbles 400ポイント401ポイント  (33子コメント)

Just to explain (I think she's misguided too) she is using the definition of feminism that equates to equity for everyone (so intersectional feminism) and is expanding everyone to animals (hardcore vegans tend to do this) so by not being vegan you are okay with enslavement and genocide and work camps, more or less.

[–]RetardedSquirrel 120ポイント121ポイント  (21子コメント)

equity for everyone

TIL feminism now includes basic income. But seriously, I thought she just used a buzzword to push her own agenda, but it sort of made sense in a way. TIL.

[–]DimitriRavinoff 115ポイント116ポイント  (18子コメント)

Whatever people on the internet may have you believe, a lot of very smart people have invested a lot of time and thought into feminism and feminist concepts. The person in the picture posted may not be one of them, but academic work tends to filter down. You may not agree with everything they say (even people who self-identify as feminists have a hard time agreeing with each other on basic concepts like "what is feminism" or "who is a woman") but there's a pretty strong internal logic that is constantly being challenged and considered.

[–]pennypun 21ポイント22ポイント  (16子コメント)

"Hey Joe, what is a woman?"

"Hmmm-mmh, yes, a very good question, indeed ..."

[–]selemena 41ポイント42ポイント  (14子コメント)

It's a genuine point of contention for certain feminist subgroups. See TERFs for instance.

[–]H41KU 51ポイント52ポイント  (13子コメント)

I think it's a stretch to call them feminists, they disregard feminist ideologies in favour of republican ones. It's more anti-transgender people, as opposed to feminism that excludes transgender people. If you go over to the lovely subs of /r/GenderCritical or /r/Gender_Critical you'll see they blatantly ignore actual feminist issues such as inequalities in the workplace, to focus on how teh evil tranz are ruining mah life.

[–]selemena 24ポイント25ポイント  (8子コメント)

Sure, I don't consider TERFs to be legitimate... well, anything really, but that's getting into No True Scotsman territory.

[–]H41KU 16ポイント17ポイント  (7子コメント)

I suppose so, but I'm not saying they're not "Real" feminists, I'm saying they're literally not feminists. The key point of feminism is equality, and the majority of TERFs don't focus on equality at all. They focus on making transgender people inequal, and very, very rarely do they stumble into the idea of wanting equality for women. They even go full RedPill at times.

[–]VindictiveJudge 13ポイント14ポイント  (0子コメント)

Holy hell, those subs are insane.

[–]lll_lll_lll 3ポイント4ポイント  (2子コメント)

It's not really that simple. I am not one of them but to say they are republican or redpill makes no sense.

They just feel the way about gender that most people feel about race: you can't convert to one you weren't born as because that is appropriation.

That is why the whole Rachel Dolezal thing raised the question of transracialism into public consciousness, which everyone concluded was a no-no. So some feminists say "wait a minute, dudes just can't convert to our status as women for the same reasons Rachel can't be black."

[–]ShittyGingerSnap 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

So you think trans women are not women? I think you might be in the wrong sub.

[–]lll_lll_lll 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

  1. I think there is no logical difference between feeling like a woman inside and feeling black inside. I think either both should be accepted or neither.

  2. I don't really care either way because I am old and this shit doesn't affect me at all.

I don't know what sub I'm in and I don't really care. This was on /all.

[–]lIlIIIlll 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

Careful, you're starting to stare too long into the abyss.

[–]PlausibleBadAdvice 24ポイント25ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well shit, sign me up for the Stasi then.

[–]motodoto 12ポイント13ポイント  (3子コメント)

Intersectional knows no bounds. It's heart is in the right place, but there's a bit of an infinite regress problem.

[–]kathartik 5ポイント6ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd say its heart may have been in the right place at some point, but not now. it seems that intersectional feminism has a problem with being bullies these days. bullies with self righteousness.

[–]jellysmacks[S] 6ポイント7ポイント  (0子コメント)

Shouldn't it just be intersectional equality?...

[–]robotteeth 52ポイント53ポイント  (67子コメント)

Vegans try to guilt trip other social movements into feeling obligated to be part of their crazy train. The feminism one has been floating around for a while. Basically boils down to that animals are having their bodies used against their will, including with artificial insemination, so obviously if you're a feminist you have to feel sad for farm animals since they're "being raped." It has not caught on and never will, but I still see it pop up occasionally.

[–]DannyMThompson 90ポイント91ポイント  (11子コメント)

Were not all preachy, you only hear from the vocal ones.

[–]kathartik 31ポイント32ポイント  (4子コメント)

just like any other movement, the vocal ones are the ones who represent your cause, so unless non-crazies stand up en masse to denounce the crazies, the entire movement will always be linked with the extremist kooks.

[–]DannyMThompson 19ポイント20ポイント  (0子コメント)

That explains how Donald Trump became president.

[–]hybridtheorist 14ポイント15ポイント  (1子コメント)

Hilariously, this guy posts on /r/kotakuinaction ! I wonder if he denounces the crazies there on a regular basis?
The gamer gaters who make death threats for example?

Personally, I think death threats are a bit worse than saying "meat is murder", but yeah, you go get them vegans buddy!

[–]rutterkin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's not quite that simple. We're a small movement so we can't really "denounce" each other "en masse." That would splinter us too much, not to mention being a waste of energy when we ought to be focusing on a common goal. It's true however that we should be critical of one another and try to discuss better and more effective means of getting our message out. You are probably seeing the fruits of that without realizing it. I mean, I'm biased (because I'm already sold on veganism) but I feel like the pro-vegan messaging in the mainstream nowadays is much more positive and less "crazy" than it was ten years ago, for instance.

I think this ad for example is a lot more persuasive than this one.

[–]rutterkin 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

Preachy vegan here. Please understand that many of us see veganism as a social justice movement. To that end, the only problem I have with "preachy vegans" is the extent to which their delivery of the message is ineffective. PETA's naked-women-in-cages bullshit, for instance. That's definitely not changing any minds.

I very strongly believe in promoting open dialogue on the topic of veganism because I want to see a societal change in attitudes. That's how all social justice movements start out. Vegan activism is no different. But the "meekness is a virtue" attitude is something I cannot personally get behind.

[–]ChuanFaFist -2ポイント-1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you eat grains, you still knowingly participate in the destruction of animal habitatand nesting sites.

[–]Ennuiner 54ポイント55ポイント  (8子コメント)

There are batshit crazy vegans but that doesn't make veganism a "crazy" social movement.

[–]natorierk -5ポイント-4ポイント  (7子コメント)

As a social movement I'd say veganism is a bit crazy. As a life choice it doesn't have to be, although I have yet to meet a true vegan with a sense of humour irl.

[–]Pest_Bringer 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

Well to be fair as a vegan, the most humor we have to hear is "bacon" or something along the lines.

[–]heycraisins 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

"For every piece of meat you don't eat, I'm going to eat two!!!"

Congratulations. That's on you, not me.

[–]Myrmec 7ポイント8ポイント  (3子コメント)

Hi.

[–]natorierk 5ポイント6ポイント  (2子コメント)

If you're suggesting you're a vegan with a sense of humour, I still haven't met you in real life. I'm sure they/you exist, but in day to day experience it seems to be a minority.

[–]MacHaggis 7ポイント8ポイント  (1子コメント)

How many vegans do you meet day to day?

[–]JDNDF 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

Probably many more than they think, it's not like they can know without paying really close attention to the buying and eating habits of everyone they meet.

[–]sudden_potato 18ポイント19ポイント  (0子コメント)

What's so crazy about veganism?

[–]Cheese_the_Cheese 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

Try being a cheesemonger in a hipster neighbourhood. At least one preachy email a week. Apparently my industry perpetuates rape culture.

[–]sela-yar 24ポイント25ポイント  (25子コメント)

"Part of their crazy train"

😹😹😹 not wanting to harm animals is really bizarre and insane, isn't it?

[–]jdegraff89 -1ポイント0ポイント  (19子コメント)

....... fuck off......

I cant even really argue this with you...

We are not the only omnivorous animals on this planet.. we were how ever resourceful enough to domesticate other animals.. we eat meat.. chimpanzees eat meat.. Baboons.. ect killing for meat is natural... now if we could just let these animals live normal lives with out all the unnatural bullshit... it would be better.. but they still have to die.

[–]Eatbig-getbig 22ポイント23ポイント  (0子コメント)

We are the only species that both understands the consequences of our actions, and is fully able to make different dietary choices

[–]sela-yar 34ポイント35ポイント  (0子コメント)

But that doesn't make it right.

Animals in the wild don't factory farm. Animals in the wild aren't tearing down the rainforest to grow soy to feed the animals they eat. Animals in the wild don't dump millions of gallons of another species' milk down the drain.

We aren't wild animals. We inflict pain and suffering even though we don't have to in order to survive. And the people who don't want to do this are told to fuck off.

[–]sudden_potato 21ポイント22ポイント  (13子コメント)

we eat meat.. chimpanzees eat meat.. Baboons.. ect killing for meat is natural

Your using the "lions eat meat, so therefore I eat meat" argument, which is kinda weak.

Wild animals kill to survive. They must kill to eat, otherwise they would die. Whether they kill on instinct or are aware of their predicament is irrelevant, we are not in their situation. If you live in modern society and have access to crops, vegetables, fruit, grains etc, then you have no obligation or need for animal products. Also, lions exhibit all kinds of behaviour that you would seek to avoid, for instance, violent territorial disputes, and male lions will kill the cubs of a female he wishes to mate with because she won't mate while she has cubs around. Lions are not good ethical role models.

[–]GrouseGrouse 4ポイント5ポイント  (12子コメント)

I eat animals because they're delicious and nutritious. And I create animals specifically fit the purpose of eating.

[–]Eatbig-getbig 16ポイント17ポイント  (0子コメント)

Creating a conscious creature "for a purpose" doesn't give you the moral right do do whatever you want to it

[–]sudden_potato 15ポイント16ポイント  (9子コメント)

I don't really want to argue, but I feel like I have to address a couple points.

I eat animals because they're delicious

I like the taste too. So do most people. It's natural to crave meat. What vegans don't like is the needless suffering animals endure in order for me to eat that meat. To say "I just like the taste" is to say "Killing is justified if I like the flavour of the dead body".

nutritious

All the major dietetics and health organizations in the world agree that vegan and vegetarian diets are just as healthy as omnivorous diets. Here are links to what some of them have to say on the subject:

American Dietetic Association

  • It is the position of the American Dietetic Association that appropriately planned vegetarian diets, including total vegetarian or vegan diets, are healthful, nutritionally adequate, and may provide health benefits in the prevention and treatment of certain diseases. Well-planned vegetarian diets are appropriate for individuals during all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy, lactation, infancy, childhood, and adolescence, and for athletes.

Dietitians of Canada

  • A well planned vegan diet can meet all of these needs. It is safe and healthy for pregnant and breastfeeding women, babies, children, teens and seniors.

The British National Health Service

  • With good planning and an understanding of what makes up a healthy, balanced vegan diet, you can get all the nutrients your body needs.

The British Nutrition Foundation

  • A well-planned, balanced vegetarian or vegan diet can be nutritionally adequate ... Studies of UK vegetarian and vegan children have revealed that their growth and development are within the normal range.

The Dietitians Association of Australia

  • Vegan diets are a type of vegetarian diet, where only plant-based foods are eaten. They differ to other vegetarian diets in that no animal products are usually consumed or used. Despite these restrictions, with good planning it is still possible to obtain all the nutrients required for good health on a vegan diet.

The United States Department of Agriculture

  • Vegetarian diets (see context) can meet all the recommendations for nutrients. The key is to consume a variety of foods and the right amount of foods to meet your calorie needs. Follow the food group recommendations for your age, sex, and activity level to get the right amount of food and the variety of foods needed for nutrient adequacy. Nutrients that vegetarians may need to focus on include protein, iron, calcium, zinc, and vitamin B12.

The National Health and Medical Research Council

  • Alternatives to animal foods include nuts, seeds, legumes, beans and tofu. For all Australians, these foods increase dietary variety and can provide a valuable, affordable source of protein and other nutrients found in meats. These foods are also particularly important for those who follow vegetarian or vegan dietary patterns. Australians following a vegetarian diet can still meet nutrient requirements if energy needs are met and the appropriate number and variety of serves from the Five Food Groups are eaten throughout the day. For those eating a vegan diet, supplementation of B12 is recommended.

The Mayo Clinic

  • A well-planned vegetarian diet (see context) can meet the needs of people of all ages, including children, teenagers, and pregnant or breast-feeding women. The key is to be aware of your nutritional needs so that you plan a diet that meets them.

The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada

  • Vegetarian diets (see context) can provide all the nutrients you need at any age, as well as some additional health benefits.

Harvard Medical School

  • Traditionally, research into vegetarianism focused mainly on potential nutritional deficiencies, but in recent years, the pendulum has swung the other way, and studies are confirming the health benefits of meat-free eating. Nowadays, plant-based eating is recognized as not only nutritionally sufficient but also as a way to reduce the risk for many chronic illnesses.

So while meat is nutritious, this nutrition is not exclusive to meat.

And I create animals specifically fit the purpose of eating.

Following this logic, if somebody has a dog living with them, and she is pregnant, then simply standing there and saying "When those puppies are born I am going to kill them all" would be enough justification for doing so. That of course is absurd. Basically, you are not in a position to determine the fate of an animal. If the argument is that some animals have been selectively bred for consumption, then again, that is not a justification. The entire process of selectively breeding them was done at the hands of humans, and all subsequent loss of life is at their say so and is entirely unnecessary.

Bringing a life into the world does not justify taking it. And think this through - in the egg industry, as soon as males are hatched, they are killed. Immediately. Did you really do that chicken a favour by bringing them into the world, to then immediately be killed? Nobody can seriously say yes to this, but that is precisely what is going on every day, and you fund that if you buy eggs.

Animals bred for meat are killed as soon as they reach a profitable size, which will typically be a few months old, or about a year. You didn't do that animal any favours.

Finally, let's extend this to animals besides livestock. You have a dog, they're pregnant. Does that mean you can slit the puppies' throats, because you were the one who arranged for your dog to get pregnant? Of course not, it's nothing to do with it.

[–]henrebotha 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

Two points.

You keep talking about killing dogs. However, killing a dog is not a necessary prerequisite for it to have puppies. By contrast, in order for an animal to be eaten, it must be killed. So the comparison is a little broken.

Look at how many times your sources mention "well-planned". That's a synonym for "expensive". A naive vegan diet is not comparable in nutrition.

[–]sela-yar 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

Neither is a naive omnivorous diet.

I don't know about you but I live in America and the general population's diet is terrible.

People don't eat enough fiber, they consume sugar to the point where type two diabetes is normal and not at all scary enough to stop eating garbage, and people eat themselves into obesity.

The studies are comparing well planned vegan diets to well planned omnivorous diets. It isn't comparing a nutritionally balanced vegan diet to the diet of someone that lives on microwave burritos and beer, so it isn't fair to say "Yeah, being vegan is just as healthy as long as you plan it." when the average person doesn't plan their diet.

[–]Frosted_Anything 6ポイント7ポイント  (1子コメント)

"well-planned". That's a synonym for "expensive"

It actually means you actually have to think about what you eat and whether or not you're getting adequate nutrition like any other diet. Not more expensive. What about a healthy vegan diet would make it more expensive?

[–]-apricotmango 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

A vegan diet is literally peasant food. In many cultures the poorer half can only afford to eat a diet with on average 5% meat. They use it as a garnish, like how americans use vegetables as a garnish.

Im talking: rice, potatoes, beans, corn and bananas.

This is what makes up my diet. The only thing I add to that is curry paste and some steamed veggies ( vegetables arent that expensive and if you have a yard you can grow them yourself, or go to a local urban garden).

[–]jazzjazzmine 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Well planned probably means 'Don't forget about your B12 and Iron.'

If you feel like being lazy about it and not eating algae, yeast, etc. Just take supplements. They cost nearly nothing.

[–]exskeletor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Probably just b12. iron is pretty abundant in dark greens

[–]Z0di 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Killing for the purpose of eating an animal is literally what farmers do.

We farm animals because it's easier than hunting.

if somebody has a dog living with them, and she is pregnant, then simply standing there and saying "When those puppies are born I am going to kill them all"

I'm pretty sure people kill unwanted puppies.

Animals bred for meat are killed as soon as they reach a profitable size, which will typically be a few months old, or about a year. You didn't do that animal any favours.

Not everything is sunshine and rainbows.

Finally, let's extend this to animals besides livestock. You have a dog, they're pregnant. Does that mean you can slit the puppies' throats, because you were the one who arranged for your dog to get pregnant? Of course not, it's nothing to do with it.

we already went over this.

[–]Exventurous 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

People kill unwanted puppies, but that doesn't make it right. Your points don't really even address his/her arguments at all, you're just dismissing them.

[–]exskeletor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Actually you probably just go to the store and buy it.

[–]Pest_Bringer 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

They still habe to die, like everything. But it gives us no right to factory farm or shorten their natural life span. And yes you cam argue that we are omnis its what got some civilizations through hard winters. But we can thrive 100% on a vegan diet no problem.

[–]KingoftheCastle94 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

But wanting to take their food is okay?

[–]sela-yar 7ポイント8ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm sure you're kidding but I don't subsist on a diet of soy and antibiotics.

[–]Z0di 2ポイント3ポイント  (2子コメント)

/r/climate and /r/environment are infested with vegans that constantly post things to try to shame people about eating meat.

My counter is "stop having kids and we can eat meat without harming the environment!"

[–]Manception 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Population is already flattening out. People are indeed stopping having kids.

Meat consumption isn't decreasing, however, and has huge impacts on the environment.

[–]exskeletor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You don't have to be vegan to understand the impacts of the meat industry on the environment.

[–]Pest_Bringer 0ポイント1ポイント  (12子コメント)

Well artificial insemination against ones will is rape

[–]JDNDF 1ポイント2ポイント  (11子コメント)

I guess the real question is if it can be called rape when it's done to animals. Many people would take offense to that, because animal suffering is not equal to human suffering, and using the same terminology might diminish the latter. Human suffering is much more serious because of our psychological complexity. That doesn't change the fact that animals suffer as well, and we should avoid all suffering when we can, just because we can. Do cows really suffer because of artificial insemination though? Really, do they?

[–]jazzjazzmine 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Pregnancies hurt, so even if you don't mind the impregnation per arm and the psychological stress from losing the calf shortly after birth, the cows suffer.

I disagree with your assertion that suffering is worse for more intelligent entities, but i feel like opening a discussion on that would lead to nothing..

[–]JDNDF 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd very much like to discuss this though.

The part I was talking about was the insemination, whether or not it's 'rape', not the consequences of the insemination.

But I agree they feel stress if the calf is taken away, and I agree pregnancy is difficult, though I think it's not any more difficult to be pregnant from artificial insemination than it is by getting mounted by a bull. Which is also 'rape'. Non-human animals don't really have consensual sex. It might seem disturbing to us, but it really shouldn't. That's their world, it's how it works, it's not wrong. Just like predators killing prey are not unethical because they don't have the capability for ethics.

I wouldn't say 'intelligence' is what defines how much we can suffer. But I think severe mental anguish requires at least a clear concept of self that is tied to episodic memory, a concept of not just being alive but 'living a life' and 'being someone'. A narrative about who we are. We have that, and it can get easily damaged in many ways, and then we feel really fucked up for a long time.

Also when it comes to rape, there's a whole baggage of social stigma and 'being a victim' that a human gets and an animal doesn't get.

Animals can definitely get messed up psychologically of course, just not to the same extent as us.

[–]BlackoutBo_93 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

I've heard this argument before, it's to do with the female animals that we get dairy from being abused. And by abused I think they mean to get milk...

[–]lissa-lex 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

...... Neither eat meat.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 626ポイント627ポイント  (120子コメント)

Feminism is about one very simple thing: Giving opportunities for self-determination to women in the same measure they're given to men. That's it. That's all.

Who can argue with that? Who would want to argue it? Nobody reasonable.

But then you add in all the other stuff... stuff that doesn't belong there... and reasonable people start saying "feminism is stupid." To be a feminist, I have to be a vegan? To be a feminist, I have to be a lesbian? To be a feminist, I have to hate all men? No. To be a feminist, I have to believe that women are equal and be willing to live by that. That's all.

It's a shame idiots like this are trying to speak out and become the face of feminism, because they're making it look like the stupidest idea ever, when it's actually one of the most important ideas ever.

[–]213Compton 121ポイント122ポイント  (89子コメント)

I mean you're forgetting intersectionality which is pretty important as there are lots of groups that are more marginalized than women.

[–]Zombie989 192ポイント193ポイント  (37子コメント)

Intersectionality isn't necessary for "feminism." Yeah, it's nice, and the best feminists seek equality for all groups, but feminism itself doesn't necessarily imply fighting for equal treatment for any group but those divided by gender.

Edit: typos

[–]SpookyAtheist 30ポイント31ポイント  (1子コメント)

Being adamantly intersectional is how you get the radicals and idiots like this one. They put every social issue under the banner of "Feminism" and No True Scotsman each other in circles while everyone else points and laughs. I'm thankful they stick to the universities and internet.

[–]sidetosidedownandup -4ポイント-3ポイント  (0子コメント)

This comment isn't likely to rise very far in the thread, which is a shame because it's very well said.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 38ポイント39ポイント  (43子コメント)

I'm not forgetting anything at all. You don't have to adhere to a particular dietary restriction in order to believe that women should have equality.

You might think vegetarianism is good. You might think feminism is good. But it's bad logic to put up a barrier to one unless you embrace the other as well.

[–]wintersmoke 22ポイント23ポイント  (20子コメント)

I think the point they're trying to make is that intersectional feminism is about more than just the equality of men and women. It acknowledges the discrepancies in the ways men and women are treated, sure, but also sees variation in the way, say, white women and women of colour are treated. Folks are more than their gender, and acknowledging how those traits intersect with privilege is part of intersectional feminism.

That said, being a lesbian, hating men, or being vegan doesn't really factor into the equation.

[–]LesterHoltsRigidCock 16ポイント17ポイント  (19子コメント)

Isn't that just egalitarianism?

[–]flametitan 10ポイント11ポイント  (11子コメント)

Mostly I just see egalitarianism being used as a way of going "I'm not sexist, BUT..."

[–]JamEngulfer221 5ポイント6ポイント  (1子コメント)

It bugs me when people go "oh no, I'm not a feminist, I'm an egalitarian". By definition that also makes you a feminist, because feminism is a subsection of egalitarianism.

And the people that say this usually don't care about the causes anyway.

[–]Pyehole 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Feminism carries a lot of baggage with it. Sure, at the simplest level what you say is true but on the other hand one can want to stand for equality while not wanting anything to do with things like the patriarchy etc...

[–]ArgonGryphon 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I use it to separate myself from the internet definition of feminist/misandry.

[–]213Compton 15ポイント16ポイント  (21子コメント)

??? I don't agree with the vegan girl at all, and you clearly don't know what intersectionality means. I'm guessing based on your reply that you think it means something to do with veganism? Why don't you look up the definition of intersectionality in feminism and get back to me? I'm not talking at all about OP's post, but rather your comment saying that feminism is only about women as a marginalized group, which is entirely incorrect.

[–]TiKels 10ポイント11ポイント  (19子コメント)

I'm not that guy, but I looked up the definition but I'm missing the important point. Yes there is relationships between categorical forms of discrimination, but what is the argument?

[–]213Compton 5ポイント6ポイント  (17子コメント)

/u/sidetosidedownandup originally stated that feminism is about one thing and one thing only, that being women's rights, and went on Monday tacking anything else onto it is a bad idea. As much as I agree that tacking on veganism for example is ridiculous, there are some other core concepts of feminism that are essential to the movement. Intersectionality in feminism basically describes how its not only women who are marginalized in society, but other groups as well, such as people of colour, people with disabilities, people of various sexual orientations and so on. I think that saying that feminism is only about womens rights is ignorant and untrue and although I'm sure that /u/sidetosidedownandup didn't mean to state it that way, I wanted to clarify that there are definitely other parts of feminism than women's rights that are very significant and definitely not ridiculous.

[–]LemonConfetti 0ポイント1ポイント  (13子コメント)

I find that pretty ridiculous. Not quite as much as the vegan, but it's up there. TIL I'm not a feminist I guess.

[–]codymariesmith 6ポイント7ポイント  (12子コメント)

wait, believing that people of color and lgbt folks deserve the same rights as white men isn't included in your idea of feminism?

[–]LemonConfetti 5ポイント6ポイント  (3子コメント)

Nope. Those are entirely separate issues.

[–]codymariesmith 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

it's not, really. feminism is the idea that men and women of all colors and sexuality deserve equality.

do you believe that people of color and lgbt folks don't deserve that equality, in general?

[–]dpash 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

That's the point of intersectionality; that they're not separate issues. That they're intersected.

[–]DeathMetalDeath -3ポイント-2ポイント  (7子コメント)

Think basically her Feminism is just being a SJW.

[–]codymariesmith 5ポイント6ポイント  (4子コメント)

is believing that people of color and lgbt folk deserve the same rights and respect as white folks of either gender really just SJW?

if your feminism stops at bringing white women up to speed with white men, it's a pretty shameful version of feminism.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Well, that's quite an imaginative re-wording of what I said. Well done, I guess?

[–]baseballfan901 -1ポイント0ポイント  (1子コメント)

kinda offensive to think gay men, or black people etc. need to come under the banner of feminism, and have basically white women advocate for their rights.

[–]213Compton 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

At what point did I say white women need to advocate for their rights? Also, there is no harm in people acknowledging the struggles that other people go through, in fact I think it's a great thing. For someone privileged to take offense on behalf of others is wrong, but thats not at all what I am talking about.

[–]dpash 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I don't think there any rational argument that can merge intersectionality and veganism. Unless you think cows are people.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

you clearly don't know what intersectionality means.

No, I'm fine in that area. Thank you.

[–]FixinThePlanet 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

there are lots of groups that are more marginalized than women.

That's an odd way to explain intersectionality

[–]Jason_Steelix 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Your comment combined with the comment you're replying to is pretty much everything wrong with third wave feminism. Fuck intersectionality.

[–]butistillwork 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'd disagree with your definition, because the real movement that we call feminism has quite clearly evolved past that. LGBT people, as well as straight men, are also subjects of feminist discourse. The power balance is not simply that women are discriminated against and men are not, and that we have to simply eliminate said discrimination against women.

But even if we take your definition we run into problems. Who is "women"? Are we talking about gender and including trans women? If so, what makes you a woman? Or are we using "women" in its more colloquial use and talking about biologically female people? And if so, are we talking just about the latter, or also the former as well? And if it's about women having the same opportunities as men, aren't you presupposing that at least all men have the same opportunities? What about poverty, race, ability?

Regardless of what you would answer to all of this, the argument in the twitter post is to not restrict feminism to humans and that thus female animals should be included in feminism by virtue of being biologically female. And given the very unclear definition of what feminism is about, that's clearly a valid argument. Obviously you're not going to agree with this if you disagree with veganism, but animal ethics is something a lot of people both casually and seriously discuss and have discussed for literally at least over a thousand years.

Maybe it'd help to think about how it's similar to the argument that you can't both be a racist and a feminist. If you're racist you don't care about all women's well-being (equally), you care about the well-being of some women (more). You could of course argue against this. You could say that feminism is not about giving absolutely equal opportunity to women, just about eliminating sexism as an axis of oppression. That would clash with a lot of people's definitions though. Including yours.

What I'm trying to say is that you can't just come in here and say that something is how you say it is. Other people with a lot of credibility to their arguments disagree with you.

And just as a last side note: If someone thinks feminism is stupid, they are at fault. They are the ones being close-minded. They are the ones not looking into it. I can see how polemics like in the OP can exacerbate that type of attitude, and it's worth discussing whether it's helpful at all, but it is definitely not to blame.

[–]Tisarwat 1ポイント2ポイント  (3子コメント)

On the one hand I think that good feminism requires much more- so much of feminism assumes that being a woman is the only marginalisation one will face, when the experiences of woc, queer women, working class women, etc will be very different from a cis white middle class woman. Obviously there's nothing wrong with being the latter but fighting only for their liberation is not okay.

On the other hand to disown those who don't hold this standard is to absolve the movement of blame or responsibility because they 'don't count' as feminist even though they have an impact on public perception.

The veganism thing tends to be an argument for environmentalism and animal welfare, but totally overlooks the fact that not everyone is in a place where it's possible- vegan food may not be available, economically viable, or take too much effort to prepare. So a lot of poor and disabled people would automatically be discounted under that. So it's actually a very exclusionary position, rather than an intersectional one.

[–]exskeletor 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

I agree with what you say, but I want to point out that most vegans realize that it isn't feasible for everyone.

[–]Harvey-Specter 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

Eh, I'm not on board with the whole "must be vegan to be feminist" thing, but I absolutely thing its feasible for anyone on the western world to be vegan.

[–]exskeletor 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

For most it is. I will say however that it is harder for some here than others. Most convenient vegan meals would be more costly than their omni counter parts. And not everyone has time to cook. But generally, yes it would be feasible for most people here.

[–]DTX1989 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

It's the "If you give a mouse a cookie" aspect of it that makes me wary of contemporary feminism.

"All it is is the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes."

"Oh, OK."

"...and this."

"Wait, what?"

"...and this..."

"OK, hold on a minute..."

"...and this..."

"Wait, wait, no, I just can't agree with that."

"Then you're not a feminist!"

"But you said..."

[–]mutilatedrabbit 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm reasonable. I can and want to argue it.

[–]thanos023 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Feminism is about one very simple thing: Giving opportunities for self-determination to women in the same measure they're given to men. That's it. That's all.

Never thought of it that way. Just realized I am a feminist.

I've always considered the modern feminism movement to be similar to BLM. Amazing in concept, but corrupted to a perverse shadow of it's intended purpose.

[–]FixinThePlanet 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Equating "all the other stuff" to "stuff that's unreasonable" is specious. There's plenty of thought that needed to be added to feminism because it was such a sexist and classist movement in practice.

[–]GetOffOfMyLawnKid -2ポイント-1ポイント  (7子コメント)

Technically, believing women are equal isn't even really a part of true feminism. For example, taking the average of men and women, men can generally lift more weight and therefore are better equipped for manual labor jobs. It's not anti-feminist to acknowledge that. All feminism is truly about is giving women a fair chance to compete in the job marketplace, in land ownership, voting, etc.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 5ポイント6ポイント  (6子コメント)

Technically, believing women are equal isn't even really a part of true feminism.

You gotta be kidding me with this.

[–]GetOffOfMyLawnKid 1ポイント2ポイント  (5子コメント)

Did you read the rest of my post and my example?

Men and women are different at the genetic level, we're not going to be the same in every way. Feminism is just about women not being subjugated to being 2nd class citizens that can't control their own destiny. You just don't know any better because it's been hijacked by man-hating bull dykes.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 9ポイント10ポイント  (3子コメント)

Yes I did read it.

You're making a very simple mistake: Mingling "equality" with "homogeneity." The point isn't who can lift a bigger bag of potatoes or who pees standing up. It's about each being different but equal.

Gender equality - not homogeneity - is at the center of feminism. How can anyone say otherwise?

[–]AwkwardReply 1ポイント2ポイント  (2子コメント)

Just wondering, but to have true equality wouldn't homogeneity be necessary too?

[–]sidetosidedownandup 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

No.

It's like saying you can only have a dollar if you use four quarters. Any other combinations of dimes and nickels and bills can't add up to a dollar. Only four quarters can.

That's silly.

[–]AwkwardReply 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Ok, then let's take mining for example, which is a male dominated field. In this context and in most cases only 4 quarters will be accepted as a dollar, how is this seen by feminism?

[–]FixinThePlanet 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

man-hating bull dykes.

Your opinion of feminism and feminists is clearly going to be rational and objective.

[–]HighOnGoofballs 39ポイント40ポイント  (17子コメント)

Someone is going to have to explain this to me

[–]middiefrosh 34ポイント35ポイント  (3子コメント)

I don't think you'll ever find your answer

[–]HighOnGoofballs 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

I'm trying to think of how eating fish is anti-feminist, but I can't.

[–]PlausibleBadAdvice 1ポイント2ポイント  (1子コメント)

If anything, I think it might be pro-feminist!

[–]A_ManHasNoUsername 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Yo I can help I just took a class on this and it's fresh on my mind! It basically comes down to this, women have been marginalized for a long time and to do that to any other group, animals included, is hypocritical and therefore anything else is not feminism. Supporting the meat industry is supporting the mass slaughter of animals and the mistreatment of animals such as forced rape of cows and plenty of other nasty things. Think of intersectionality as solidarity and it makes more sense. So it's standard gatekeeping lol but it doesn't mean it's illogical they have valid reason.

Before anyone wonders....I eat meat

[–]Manception 36ポイント37ポイント  (10子コメント)

Connecting veganism and feminism isn't that far out there if you stop to think beyond this one extreme opinion.

There are gender aspects to meat eating. The most obvious examples are found in advertising. There are plenty of ads framing eating meat as something real men do.

Eating meat has health consequences for men, so guys have good reason to care. I mean, beyond meat helping to destroy our planet.

Also, feminists aren't usually just feminists, but care about other social justice issues too, and there are plenty of those connected to feminism and the meat industry, like environmentalism, migrant worker rights and racism.

With that comes ideological opposition to feminism and environmentalism from antifeminists who see meat eating as a protest, just as they might drive a gas guzzling SUV or buy lots of guns.

With that said, requiring veganism for being a feminist is just gatekeeping.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 20ポイント21ポイント  (3子コメント)

I think that with important principles, it's good to keep things simple. "Do you believe women should have as much power to self determine as men, and the same opportunities to do so?" It's a yes or no question. If someone replies with "Yes, but I really like eating hotdogs, so I can't be a feminist" then the way you're asking the question is wrong.

[–]Manception -1ポイント0ポイント  (2子コメント)

Keeping it simple absolutely has its uses, but reducing the message to a soundbite easily goes wrong. Reality is complex, especially when you start connecting feminism with different issues like gender and race.

[–]LemonConfetti 12ポイント13ポイント  (0子コメント)

Expanding a focused cause into more and more causes usually goes wrong. Keeping the focus on the gender equality of humans in their society is a vast topic, not a soundbite.

[–]sidetosidedownandup 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

I didn't say reducing. I said "keep it simple." I assume it's understood that the latter doesn't necessitate the former.

Yes, reality is complex in some ways, but people also take very simple things and make them needlessly complex... often diluting the core of the whole thing with agendas and special interests that want to bolt their own cause to a bigger one in order to give it buoyancy.

If someone says "What is feminism?" and I say "It's a belief that women are equal to men and, if you eat a hamburger, you disagree with that idea"... that's how we know we've diffused the core message too much.

The implications and executions of feminism are fluid and adaptable and can be changed to suit the exigencies of a culture or region as necessary. But the core of it is and always will be: The equality of men and women. And describing it as such is sufficient.

[–]ponyproblematic 11ポイント12ポイント  (1子コメント)

As well, a lot of things that I've seen have been linked via the treatment of cows and things like that. Like, I've seen someone say "you say you're against rape but you're fine with female cows being forcibly raped and inseminated and confined to give people their milk" and that sort of thing. If you believe that animals should be protected at the same level as humans, it isn't that much of a logical jump to say that a lot of things in the meat industry are antifeminist in nature.

[–]HighOnGoofballs 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

You can have ethical meat, eggs, and many non-vegetables.

[–]HighOnGoofballs 4ポイント5ポイント  (2子コメント)

I could maybe buy the vegetarian argument, but not a vegan one. I can't recall many ads about how manly cocktail shrimp are.

[–]carl_super_sagan_jin 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you're a man-eater, you can't be a feminist.

[–]grrrbz 36ポイント37ポイント  (5子コメント)

Let me take a crack at this logic. If you eat meat, you support the business of factory farming. Factory farming means a lot of animals need to be born. For a lot of animals to be born, you have to force a lot of pregnancies onto these animals. This "force" would be rape and promoting rape is against feminism. Do I win?

[–]jellysmacks[S] 24ポイント25ポイント  (19子コメント)

I didn't mean to start a war. I've learned my lesson.

[–]silentxem 16ポイント17ポイント  (18子コメント)

Nah, there are some interesting discussions in these comments.

[–]jellysmacks[S] 34ポイント35ポイント  (17子コメント)

And there are also a lot of people who have no real argument, just "fuck feminism"

[–]silentxem 8ポイント9ポイント  (0子コメント)

From what I have seen, they are in the minority, and heavily downvoted. I'm just saying, there are some interesting conversations being had (like in the top thread), and anytime feminism is brought up, there's bound to be some backlash from a certain kind of person. Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.

[–]Fgame 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Eh, fuck anyone who tries to tell me what my beliefs are.

[–]Manception 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

And there are also a lot of people who have no real argument, just "fuck feminism"

Welcome to reddit. You can't have a discussion or even mention of social issues on big subs without these comments.

[–]elbenji 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

But not the most upvoted. This makes me happy. It's like the good ol days of TiA

[–]TheFuckYouTalkinBout 12ポイント13ポイント  (1子コメント)

This HAS GOT to be a joke. Pretty funny, actually. Taking a stab at all the people connecting irrelevant categories.

[–]DeportAlexTrebek 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

it is a joke i found the tweet. Hilarious stufff

[–]skwid79 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

If you're a feminist and reasonable, the internet is a harsh place. Sorry OP.

[–]varkarrus 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I spend a lot of time on tumblr, where the opposite holds true :P

[–]niktemadur 3ポイント4ポイント  (0子コメント)

A lot of confused, hysterical people on every side of the political spectrum nowadays :-(

[–]gcz77 2ポイント3ポイント  (1子コメント)

She is saying that feminism is about utilitarian ethics. In other words it's about stopping pain. So given that you care about stopping pain you should also care about pain in animals. If you just care about girls but don't really care about stopping people (or non human persons, or animals ) from being in pain then you aren't a real feminist.

In other words she's saying that feminism isn't about any special preference towards girls, it's about mitigating suffering in all of it forms, one of which happens to be discrimination against women.

[–]wreckelessj 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I agree with you said but I'm about 99% sure she didn't even know that's what she was saying.

[–]varkarrus 7ポイント8ポイント  (2子コメント)

TBH not really... It just makes Veganism look like a joke.

[–]PowerfulWarbird 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

I mean, I'm confused now..

[–]eatsnailsmalfoy 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

If you claim to like/support x but you don't conform to my way of life/opinions you're doing it wrong!

[–]Andy_B_Goode 3ポイント4ポイント  (5子コメント)

I think this is something that's fundamentally different between left-wing and right-wing politics. Someone on the extreme right would never bother to say "if you claim to be a conservative and you're not a race realist, then you're absolutely confused on what the meaning of conservative is!" (at least, I've never noticed anyone saying that) Instead, they're content to blur the line between moderate and extreme in the hopes of luring people further towards their extremist ideology, and they can see that even a moderate conservative should be viewed as an ally.

I don't know why people on the left insist on being so fractured, but you see it from all directions. Socialists shit on liberals, feminists shit on liberals, vegans shit on liberals, gay rights activists shit on liberals, and then the next thing you know Trump is in the white house and everyone blames liberals for not stopping him. It's really frustrating.

[–]Supernova141 3ポイント4ポイント  (1子コメント)

I've often heard the opposite sentiment(though toward republicans and democrats, not conservatives and liberals). I hear people say that republicans are always in-fighting, while democrats don't (publicly) go against each other even when they have differing views.

[–]Remember- 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That applies more to Democrat politicians rather than the general liberal population. The democratic party does do a good job of preventing in-fighting

[–]CaturdayPicnic 4ポイント5ポイント  (0子コメント)

This is just one crazy person. This is not the view of a typical vegan.

[–]ivquatch 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Liberals fucking deserve it. They think they're better because they're more "practical" and mainstream, but they're totally fine with Obama dropping bombs on yemen and pakistan.

[–]Justice502 4ポイント5ポイント  (8子コメント)

This is what created President Trump

[–]DontHasAReddit 11ポイント12ポイント  (6子コメント)

What...?

[–]blackhole885 0ポイント1ポイント  (5子コメント)

i get what he is saying

the 'alt left' victim culture and crybullies, politics swung too far in their favour and trump is a reaction towards that

[–]BumwineBaudelaire 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

and by the looks of things it will guarantee him 8 years in office

[–]PM_ME_UR_KITTIES_PLS 1ポイント2ポイント  (0子コメント)

Everyone is all serious but the tweet seems like satire.

[–]VoodooMonkiez 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

Idk I think that could be the intention of the tweet

[–]TotesMessenger 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm a bot, bleep, bloop. Someone has linked to this thread from another place on reddit:

If you follow any of the above links, please respect the rules of reddit and don't vote in the other threads. (Info / Contact)

[–]lysurgicacid15 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

modern feminism IS a joke

[–]lanceinmypants 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

I only eat male animals.