When I was tabling with my campus feminist group, it was extremely disconcerting that so many people had no idea what the movement was all about and were turned off merely by the name. After explaining really what we stood for, 95% of people nodded and agreed. Feminsim has been made into a dirty word. Most people think of man-hating, hairy, vegetarian lesbians with an axe to grind with the world.
I would like to note here that this is not what feminism is or has ever been. Well, maybe we are pissed at the world a bit.
I have heard discussions over the word within feminist circles that usually revolve around the stigma associated with it.
On the one hand- bell hooks argued that by labeling a movement "feminist" it allows a binary opposition to be set up, exemplified by "masculine" movements. While I would argue that the masculine movement is the system that the feminist movement sought to change, but the implications of the thoery are interesting. Feminism is really about the equality between all women and all women, and supporting the efforts to create a society where men and women are equals. But by tagging it specifically as a "feminist" movement limits what the movement is really about.
On the other hand, the word attaches us to the rich history of the cause. Who cares if right-wing pundits throw the word around like an insult? Feminism has taken such a negative connotation by some exactly because we have accomplished so much and we have shaken society to the core. Very scary for the more mysogynistic people in the crowd.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I am a male, but I believe in femiminism. I was raised in a single parent home by my mother. My mother is a strong and independent woman who works two jobs. I believe it is so important to support women in their endeavors. I am always paying attention to equality issues. Hopefully, one day there will be a female President of the U.S. I do not like that the men's NCAA basketball tourney is getting more attention than the women's. I believe in equality, and I stand for it. Women and men are created equal and should be given equal opportunity to succeed.
The men's NCAA tourney receives more interest because people find it more interesting, not because the NCAA or the media is against women's sports. The networks just have to play what people will watch more.
As much as I agree in men and women being equal, there are some things I dont want to see changed. Dont get me wrong, I am a strong believer in the idea of equal pay but I, for one, like the idea that I dont have to register for the draft and that I get maternity leave (with pay) when I have kids.
Wouldn't it be sweet if your newborn's father was able to get paid paternity leave though?
As for the draft....that is a post for another day :)
You said it! If you really have time, I suggest you delve deep into ProgressiveU and look for the anti-femenist posts. They're pretty stereotypical and ignorant... I've commented on one too many.
Insert Shameless Self-Promotion Here -- http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/ada-castellon
First of all, there are many, many terms freighted with so much baggage that I hesitate ever to use or encourage others to use them in conversation. Liberal, feminist, hippie, progressive, to name a few...
"Feminism" semantically implies inequality, because, as an "ism", it promotes something that is theoretically already unjust or inequal. So it promotes an ideology that women have been and are currently less equal according to some ambiguous societal force, and therefore should receive due compensation/appreciation/recognition for their plight. I dont' think I made that sound very clear, but my point is that it's like overcompensating for being treated unfairly by asking for special treatment. It's inherently inequal, for example, when Isaac Terry wrote "it's important to support women in their endeavors" -- not that he means it negatively, but he (at least rhetorically/linguistically) assumes that he is part of a different world than women.
It's like disability rights with stem cell research--many of the disabled community are offended that the rhetoric to support stem cell research assumes that many disabilities can and need to be "cured." Or, perhaps a better example, the rich giving scholarships or handouts to the lesser advantaged (or the lesser advantaged asking for scholarships or handouts) doesn't make the lesser advantaged suddenly rich or advantaged; it's like a pity vote. Yeah, it's still a vote, but does it really make things equal?