Gender - Printable Version

Spoiler below!

I'm not as well-read on this subject as I should be, but from what I have read of ideological feminism (as distinct from a desire to have equal rights for everyone) is that everything is seen through an extremely biased lens. Just as a conspiracy theorist sees the hand of the New World Order in all of society's affairs, no matter how seemingly banal they might be, the ideological feminist sees the hand of men and the oppressive patriarchy in everything. Even when the system seems to privilege women over men it's not seen as evidence against the idea of a patriarchy, it's simply taken as further evidence for it:

"Women are greatly benefited by the court system, both in terms of jail times/punishment for crimes and custody of children. Doesn't that show that women aren't oppressed by an inherently oppressive, conspiratorial system?"

"No, it proves that women are infantilised by men and are seen as weak and in need of more privilege."

"So you do have some privilege?"

"It's hardly privilege, it's simply further evidence that we're not in control of our own destinies!"

"So we'll even things out and given you the same jail terms and custody rights as men?"

"Hell no, we fought hard for these things!"

The statistics and data offered by ideological feminists are often taken as read by casual observers, but the issues are always much more complex than the way in which they're presented. Domestic violence has been studied extensively, for instance, and everyone seems to assume that men are mostly perpetrators and women victims. Studies which are conducted without pre-determined outcomes, and which ask dispassionate and fairly-worded questions, show something closer to gender symmetry in domestic violence. It's an idea so alien to the popular view of the issue that you'd probably get a pretty confused and sceptical look from anyone to whom you said it, despite the fact that the studies are available to anyone. Take nothing on faith.

This is why discussion of feminism is often met with such displeasure. It's not because people don't care about what happens to women, it's because of the way in which the issue is presented and argued, i.e. using questionable scientific and historical evidence, telling men that they're both scum and part of the solution in the same breath, presenting women as victims and men as perpetrators before the discussion even begins, injecting ideological feminist viewpoints into everything, rattling off sound-bites in place of data, etc. You don't need to be a well-read, educated adult to be irritated by that.

I reject the claims of ideological feminists that gender discrimination is unquestionably a problem perpetrated on women by men. I reject the notion that there is a systemic and deliberate conspiracy (or even an unconscious desire) by males to dominate society and the affairs of women. I also reject the following ideological feminist beliefs:

Men are defective women, genetically speaking.
Men are naturally inclined towards rape, violence and misogyny and are only prevented from doing so by socialisation.
Men should be reduced in number for the betterment of society and women.
Misandry doesn't exist or only exists as a direct response to misogyny.
A woman would never make a false claim of rape/battery/harassment because the traumatic ordeal of going through the system is too great, or some other such rationale.
The system is generally (and even severely) slanted in favour of men.
There exists a "rape culture" which normalises the abuse of women.
Rape is generally a female problem and a male crime.
Women get the short end of the stick in almost all circumstances.

Humanism is a much easier position to defend than feminism, and it's a hell of a lot more beneficial to all of society. I want what everyone else here seems to want, but I think there's a better way to go about attaining it than ideological feminism, or even moderate/progressive feminism for that matter.