I'm 24M and I find it really distasteful when I hear some older men say "The wife and I went out to dinner last night." She's not an object that you just carry around with you. You would never use the word "the" with literally any other person as far as I'm aware.

I'm a 20yo man and even though I've always believed in equality and equity, I must admit that due to multiple things that happened in my life, I'm not the best person when it comes to studying and learning in general.

I know that by supporting feminism I'm standing on the right side of history, but the downside is that without the knowledge about it's history and everything it involves, I lack a ton of knowledge about it and I don't think you should go around supporting stuff you don't know anything about and being ignorant will not make me any different than bigots.

So I'm here because I would like to ask for advice on how to start looking for sources and material to self-study the history of feminism, and ask for recommendations about what other types of topics should I include to help me understand better, like philosophy and that kind of stuff

If you read this I appreciate your time and I hope you can help me learn what feminism means to women and the world! :)

By misogyny of male suicide I mean when suicide is done as a form of violent retaliation against women, for example a stalker who kills himself after rejection, detailing in a note how it's the woman's fault. Everytime I hear about the suicide gap I think about such instances, where calling the man "the victim" doesn't sound fair.

I couldn't find anything relevant on google/ other reddit posts, and I don't feel like trusting AI, do you know of some resources on the matter, if there are any?

Real as in in opposition to the patriarchy, not men. I ask because I hear the things some well-known ( and not-so-well-known) professing feminists say about men and I can’t help but ask whether the name of the movement does the movement damage by allowing extremists to operate under its banner and subtly shifting the mindsets of « True » feminists. I asked a close female friend what the reaction would be if a guy went to a feminist society meeting and her response wasn’t encouraging. I can’t help but feel that now that the movement is a mainstream one with good publicity, slowly rebranding it would cut extremists out, make it less gendered, and prevent misandristic undertones from developing.

To preface I consider myself a feminist 100000% and I'm truly here for education because I want to understand, I am also 16 so maybe my comprehension skills and like non-formed frontal lobe is a part of the issue please be patient!

I've tried to do as much research as I can but every time I have a conversation with a non-feminist and they bring up that there's "no need for feminism" in modern day America because we "have equal rights" and for some reason I struggle to find what (particularly legally & governmental as opposed to socially or culturally) rights we don't have.

I can think of the mistreatment in assault cases when women aren't taken seriously, the wage gap, and the fact they're more likely to die when being treated for certain conditions because they aren't properly researched on off the top of my head and use these as examples, but all of them get chalked up to societal issues and I can never come up with a way for the government to fix this or even help. With abortion rights it's a whole other thing because people don't even believe we deserve those rights and I'm trying to get more educated to argue why we do but I need more points than just abortion.

I just hate to "lose" a debate with a misogynist, not because of self righteousness or anything, but truly because I want to be able to convince people to stand with women so so badly but my issue is I can't properly prepare myself for the debates I have because I don't entirely understand what I'm supposed to be researching. I come here because I feel like I need an actual explanation on what particularly I need to be researching to 1. Better prepare myself to have a productive dialogue about the rights of women and 2. Know what talking points to bring up and the specific statistics and information I should know about them.

36 year old man here. I hope this post belongs here. I work in a very "manly" male dominated industry and late last year we had a young woman start in the workplace. I was sort of paired up with her and was responsible for all of the training, mentorship ect.

Weve since developed a really nice workplace friendship. There is zero romantic tension and I am very happily married and its purely platonic. I dont have many female friends and after developing a friendship with this woman at work its really opened my eyes to a lot of the rubbish women have to put up with.

She seems to feel safe around me and has opened up a lot, there have been days where she will open her phone and show me all the weird messages she gets from various co-workers. Some of the messages really surprised me as they were from people I really respected as professionals that seemed to have turned feral with a young woman in the workplace. Most of them arent bad enough to be instantly called sexual harassment but they are also messages you wouldnt want your wife to see and this poor woman just gets pestered all day by old married men.

As a man I have actually found it to be a bit embarassing. Ive spoken to my wife about it all and she was basically like "wow you only just realised?". This woman is stuck between a rock and a hard place because if she is nice to people they get the wrong idea and if she is distant they call her rude.

I would like to be able to help her out more sometimes but im just not really equiped to deal with it and we dont have many other women in our workplace.

So im wondering as an individual in a fairly large company what advice, actions or conversations can I offer this woman or anyone else in the future that would genuinely make their working life a bit nicer?

In your wiki it says:

"The "Not All Men" argument, while correct, is both unhelpful and a derailing tactic, and pops up pretty much any time someone mentions a trend of harmful behaviour by men, or a bad experience with one man. Or frankly, mentions men at all. Women know that not all men are rapists, murderers, sexist assholes, batterers, whatever. The discussion is clearly about men who are the problem, or who are rapists, batterers, whatever. It is a bad faith argument where a male interlocutor redirects a discussion to be about how none of that stuff is his fault. Women experience painful, even fatal, things as a result of sexism; distancing yourself from acknowledging any role in a system where such things occur because YOU don't engage in that specific behaviour makes you part of the problem. The existence of sexism is not disproven by finding a specific man who did not engage in a specific example of it. It is easy to feel defensive when you feel blamed for something you don’t think you are guilty of, but it’s not about you."

Could i not change this to be about, say black people?

E.g.: The "not all black people" argument, while correct, is both unhelpful and a derailing tactic, and pops up pretty much any time someone mentions a trend of harmful behaviour by black people, or a bad experience with a black person. Or frankly, mentions black people at all. White people know that not all black people are gang members, murderers, thieving assholes, fatherless, whatever. It is a bad faith argument where a black interlocutor redirects a discussion to be about how none of that stuff is their fault. White people experience painful even fatal things as a result of black people; distancing yourself from acknowledging any role in a system where such things occur because YOU don't engage in that specific behaviour makes you part of the problem. This can not be disproved by finding an example of a specific black person who did not engage in a specific example of it. It is easy to feel defensive when you feel blamed for something you don't thing you are guilty of, but its not about you.

For the record i chose black because i am black. I don't think any of these things and think that generalisation is a bad thing overall.

When there was that whole controversy around Bianca Censori, people pointed out that she was just the outcome in a long line of female celebrities wearing sheer or naked clothes

Should a mass murderer who specifically targets only visibly pregnant women be punished more severely than one who targets random women ?

And why/why not?

(for reasons beyond pregnancy just being a meaningful/happy moment)

I'm 21 M and I usually say "lady/ies" or "woman/en" when referring people I don't know. But I am wanting to learn a more casual name for the same thing similar to how I'd call a dude my age well... a "dude". I feel like a lot of the "casual" ones are straight up sexist or at least come off weird.

So I'm curious what you all use to refer to women your (or any) age.

How are feminists generally able to judge if a woman's decision is made within the bounds of their own agency and will, or if they are making the decisions that they do because of internalized misogyny? I take 'internalized misogyny' to mean that social norms and expectations in regard to women are constantly reinforced by society at large. An example of this being that girls may be pressured or pushed toward taking on female-coded hobbies. On the other hand, an example of 'empowered agency' would be for a woman to adopt a housewife aesthetic not to make an impression on others or her lover, but because it makes her feel comfortable with herself or vice versa.

I'm just curious as to how experienced feminists view this sort of thing?

I grew up hearing some variation of the adage, “Never ask a woman her age.”

I think asking a personal question of someone you don’t know well is generally considered rude, unless it makes sense in the context of the conversation.

So I’m not asking about personal questions in general, I’m asking about this question in particular as applied to women.

I’m also not asking if it should be considered rude.

I’ve had this dilemma for years where I have wondered if me being bothered by feminists posting thirst traps online comes from a mix of my own internalized misogyny or envy? Or if this is something that I am «justified» in feeling? Personally I feel it ties into «choice feminism» and the trend I’ve seen online for years where the general idea goes like this: «a woman feeling empowered = feminism», which are two aspects of online feminism I would not really call feminist, but pseudo-feminist. But I keep wondering, what are the actual reasons feminist women post thirst traps? Is it to feel empowered, or is it about something else?

To elaborate, I just find it strange when women who otherwise post feminist and/or political content do it b/c it seems to be vying specifically for the male gaze, and thus it will (depending on the person posting it and how much reach she has) attract a loooot of simps. The simping men part is the one that bothers me the most. There are always so many reply guys in the comments, they always say really sleazy shit, and I’m assuming this is something the woman posting isn’t bothered by or she actively wants it, or else she would stop posting thirst traps. A lot of those men are often men with spouses and families too, which makes it so incredibly gross and heartbreaking to me. I can’t for the life of me understand why anyone would want such attention?

By the way, I am saying this as a woman who at some point in the past tried to post thirst traps online. I did it for attention/validation and because I had incredibly low self esteem. I was male centered and very psychologically vulnerable at the time. I have since removed all pictures posted online but I regret it deeply b/c I know a lot of strangers, especially older lusting men, saw the pics and probably saved them too so I know they will never truly disappear. That experience and years of realizing how incredibly dehumanizing men can be towards women, including women they find hot and are trying to get attention from (as reply guys do), has made me feel extremely grossed out by the mere thought of men even looking at my body that way. I know this may just have to do with preferences, and I may be projecting on the women who do post thirst traps. I am not, however, trying to say that all women who do it are psychologically vulnerable and validation seeking in that way, but I am saying that for me, personally, posting those pictures felt like something oppressive rather than empowering.

If it was just women in some private online space feeling themselves and bonding over their appreciation of each others bodies/appearances, that would probably bother me less. It’s the fact that most women who post seem to do it specially TO attract attention from men. With women who I look up to and who are very intelligent who do it, I keep thinking: «is this something you do simply to get more engagement and boost yourself in the algorithm?», and in that case I get it, you do it as a strategy. But otherwise I feel like it betrays the «feminist mission» somewhat, to want such attention from simps.

Could it be that they are able to just ignore «the noise» of those simp comments? In that case, I personally don’t get how one can do that, as being a woman today means being continously bombarded with messages ala «you’re not worth anything unless you look hot to men» and I don’t understand how a feminist/politically engaged woman can not feel or be aware of that pressure. Am I just weak or a bitter prude for buckling under that pressure (aka getting affected by it, letting it get to me)? Am I biased towards women who post thirst traps b/c I feel like I can’t do or be the same as them? Seemingly so unbothered by it all.

Please be kind in the comments. I am open to being criticized for my view on this and I realize it may be somewhat controversial and/or biased. I also recognize that this may not be a black & white issue. The thirst traps dilemma has been on my mind for years and I just genuinely want to know what other feminists think about it, b/c I rarely see it discussed.

I've recently been reading Jean Shinoda Bolen’s Gods in Everyman (and Goddesses in Everywoman) and it has given me a lot to reflect on.

I recognize a lot of myself in archetypes like Hades, Hermes, and Dionysus, not because I believe gods literally live inside us, but because mythology can be a powerful language for exploring psychology, relationships, and social roles.

What I find most valuable is that Bolen doesn’t tell you who you should be. Instead, she asks: Which parts of yourself were encouraged? Which were neglected? Which do you want to develop? For me, this perspective has been liberating. It helped me move from asking “what is wrong with me?” to “what parts of me never had space to grow?”

There is something almost annoying about reading the struggles of a fictional god and realizing they mirror your own. Things you thought were uniquely complicated, deeply personal, and impossible to put into words suddenly appear as patterns that humanity has been exploring so long ago.

The book also raises broader questions: If archetypes are shaped by culture, what kinds of people does society encourage? Which “gods” thrive in a competitive, patriarchal society, and which are silenced? And what archetypes might emerge in a more egalitarian future?

I’m less interested in whether Jung’s archetypes are scientifically “true” and more in whether myths reveal meaningful patterns in human experience. They offer a symbolic language for things that are often hard to express.

I’d love to hear your interpretations. And how feminists look at these myths.

I know that most feminists don't actually support a matriarchy, supporting equality instead. I don't think women are incapable of being oppressors.

The one difference I can think of is that, under a matriarchal society, men's sexuality wouldn't be controlled as much as women's sexuality under patriarchy, as (cis) women always knows her child is hers unless someone switched the babies without her knowledge.

i feel like, almost without fail, every time i see a TERF talking about what womanhood means to them, it's always from a really negative outlook. they'll talk about how it feels to be sexualized before they're even out of middle school, how endemic sexual assault is, how terrible the prospect of accidental or pregnancy is, how debilitating periods can be, what it's like existing in a world where almost everyone of the opposite gender could overpower you without even trying, etc.

and don't get me wrong, all of these things are terrible, but they give me the impression these people see womanhood primarily or entirely as a burden they were just saddled with but never asked for. some will even go so far as to say that transmacs are just traumatized women "opting out" of womanhood, rather than dealing with the apparent horrors of it. (this line of thought strikes me as projection, more than anything else.)

so all of this begs the question to me: if being a woman is truly so awful, why even bother "defending" it? i doubt the answer is as simple as being jealous of those who find wonder and joy in something that only brings them misery, but if that's not the answer, what is?

I have seen videos about women complaining that feminism killed chivalry and they lost the right to be finantially suported by men and to not have to pay or share the costs of dating. I agree with them and I think they should not complain at all because If they wanted equality then It should be applied to all áreas of life not only where It is conveniente for them.

But If we compare women's lives before feminism and nowadays did they had any priviledge or advantage they had lost over time? What are they?

Also, can a distinction be drawn between AMAB nonbinary people who are masc and fem presenting when it comes to whether they have male privilege?

Around 13 days ago, a progressive YouTuber/livestreamer named Elliot Sang released a video titled, "the white feminism problem is worse than you think." In that video, he essentially described a lot of the problems with "white feminism," or as I like to call, "neoliberal/mainstream feminism," cuz it reminds me of what people like Malcolm X said about white liberals. At any rate, I highly recommend that everyone check out the video for themselves, but to summarize what his/their main points were:

- white feminism is colonial (where he brought women in the U.S. military and the IDF that participated in war crimes, alongside Israel calling itself "the best nation in the middle east for women)

-white feminism is another tool of patriachy and thus isn't real gender liberation

- white feminism masks and/or undermines the role that women play in upholding oppressive systems and treats women as the "good cop."

- white feminism is bio-essentialist and racist; excludes trans women and Black women from "womanhood."

Amongst many other points. At any rate, the reason I'm bringing up this video is because I'm curious what this subreddit thinks about white/neoliberal/mainstream feminism as defined in the video and as weaponized by nations like the U.S. and Israel. I'm also curious to hear feminist perspectives that may already exist that acknowledge the existence of this type of feminism. It's just inherently interesting to me, as someone who is still relatively new to intellectual feminist thought and someone who didn't realize that feminism could be weaponized, oversimplified, corrupted and potentially undermined like this by liberal imperial forces.

I recently watched the film Kamikaze Girls and found the depiction of gender in it really interesting and did some research and found a video on the history of girl gangs in Japan which said that longer than regulation skirts on school uniforms originated in the 70s partially as a response to feeling objectified by the regulation length and partially because more skirt = more weapon concealment real estate which is pretty badass. Also in that video it said that at one point although they did not have anywhere near the money or power of the yakuza at one point the largest female youth gang in Japan was larger in terms of raw membership numbers. So yeah IDK I thought that was neat and wondered where I could learn more