Would you date a feminist?

Post Reply New Topic

*Please* let's redefine "feminist."

Otherwise we just bounce around expressing ourselves on different things, which is what the word feminist has now come to mean. Different things. The net effect is that it has no meaning at all.

What's a good reason to do that? This is 2016, that's why. I remember (and was part of) the first feminist consciousness raising groups in the early 1970s. What we wanted in those days no longer applies. Pardon the phrase, but we've come a long way baby.

It seems to me from reading this thread that we each have a different definition of feminism. That's no way to have a fruitful discussion, is it?

I'm going to start another thread What Does Feminism Mean to You - I wonder if we can agree on something.

While you may feel some generalisations about an entire gender are true, that does not make it any less against the rules of this forum to make sweeping generalisations about entire genders. If you want to talk about "all women are like x" or "men are like y" then go to a forum where they allow such generalisations and talk about it there. Otherwise, stop making sweeping generalisations about women here or you'll get reported and eventually banned.

Pointing out recurring trends and patterns within your life experiences and your's alone are not generalizations.

AR15000 may have made one or two, but my statements on Feminist's are not.

My experiences may be limited as a 17 year old teenager, but from what I have observed in my own experiences, the experiences of all of my friends and family, the internet and just plain random people I've come across, and apparently, even here online as a fair few males here have also experienced the same things as I have (negative experiences with Feminism), but my experiences still have a right to be a part of the discussion.

And it is to my experiences that most teenage females I come across who are Feminist's, tend to date males who are at least one or more of the three - skinny/out-of-shape, nerdy/geeky, or a normal level of masculinity for a teenage male of today.***

***(which I consider to be effeminate, as I believe most males today are more feminine today than men of the past. So when I say a 'feminine' male, I mean a normal millenial male, and 'traditionally masculine' means a traditionally masculine millenial).

Your experiences wilburforce are different, as all of my generalizations were intended to be applied strictly to millenial females in the 16-25 age range.

And, in this age range, I have had negative experiences with these modern neo-feminist's that are the starting signs of fourth-wave Feminism.

Do tell me, wilburforce, how equal was your relationship with the traditionally masculine male? Did you accept his traditional masculinity, and did you ever do things his way?

For instance, if you insist on paying for yourself on dates, did you ever let him pay for you and you did not have to contribute one cent of your own money?

Or was he content with not doing things his way at all and simply allowing you to indoctrinate your Feminist ideals as the standards for the relationship?

I don't mean to intrude onto your personal life, I merely mean to ask that, if you have evidence of at least one relationship contrary to my generalization that millenial Feminist's age 16-25 tend to somewhat 'convert' the traditionally masculine males they date or dump them if they can't live up to their ideals, to please state your evidence so that I have hope there's at least some Feminist's out there not like that, as I have encountered none.

Maybe it's a better idea if I ask LydiaMarie if she's indoctrinated her Feminist ideals into her relationship and he's just been forced to go along with it?

Because just because the traditionally masculine male isn't vocal about his objections, doesn't mean he's satisfied with dating an extremist Feminist.

I do know LydiaMarie said in some earlier posts she does not manipulate her boyfriend, but that's not the same as changing the relationship so that it leans towards modern Feminism contrary to traditional masculinity, chivalry and gender roles.

Guys, you should watch this, so funny.



Btw, the gaming company who created the last character (female) was forced to change the butt shape to make it less 'sexualized'.

As far as I know, the rules say nothing about making generalisations about feminists--just about entire genders. They (feminists and women) are not equivalent, so I'm not sure why you're saying this.



It was an even power dynamic, as I wasn't ever in the past and won't ever in the future be in a relationship that is not evenly balanced in regards to power dynamics. I accepted him as he was but I didn't let him tell me what to or how to be, and he did the same for me. I'm not sure what you mean by "his way"--we never did anything that wasn't OUR way, something we both chose. This is what an equal relationship looks like--you both do what you want, when you're together or apart.



I never insisted on paying for myself on dates, because I never really had any money and we didn't go out a lot on traditional dates because of that and also because I wasn't interested in going out on traditional dates most of the time (like going out to dinner at a nice restaurant--that makes me uncomfortable and I don't care for it). Occasionally we would go to the pub for a few beers and chicken wings or to shoot pool or go to a movie (because those things are cheap and if I couldn't afford to pay I didn't feel like I was putting him out expecting him to pay when I didn't have the cash). However, when we lived together I paid half the rent and I bought my share of the food--as I would do with any kind of roommate, whether a romantic partner or a friend.



I don't even know how to answer this, it's so extremely one or the other black-and-white. As I said before, it was an even power dynamic, which you apparently have trouble conceptualising. He didn't make decisions for me and I didn't make decisions for him. He made his own decisions in regards to his own life (what he wanted to take in school, where he wanted to work, what clothes he wore, music he listened to, people he hung out with, etc) and I made my own decisions in regards to my own life in the same way. When the decisions involved both of us (where we were going to live, for example) we made those decisions together.



My "evidence", just like yours, is anecdotal. Not sure why it matters at all to anyone for that reason.



Maybe you need to learn that there is a middle ground between the extreme options you are presenting, and that middle ground is a relationship with a healthy balanced power dynamic where each participant is responsible for their own selves and their own individual choices, and choices involving both parties are made together with input and agreement from both sides.



Any objections my ex had about anything he was very good at vocalising, as was I. This is probably why we lasted as long as we did--we could talk about the things we were thinking and feeling, the both of us.

Does that sufficiently answer your questions?

I'm aware equal power dynamics can exist, yes.

And it appears that yes, you did have one, which does answer my questions. Sounds like he was a good man.

It's just, in my own relationships and dates I went on with Feminist, our 'discussions' over payment and such were less 'calm, persuasive discussion' but playful banter - They always won me out in the end. So we always did things 'her way'.

It doesn't feel very equal when, no matter how much you insist to treat your partner and shout for them, they can never accept that and only want to pay for themselves and you pay independently for yourself.

I guess I don't end up with equal relationships than, as there is no compromise on their part regarding lifestyle/activties.

Just once, I'd love the feeling of being able to treat someone, to make an effort to be romantic or chivalrous and them just accepting it as me expressing my interest in them, and not my way of in-debting them or something.

^ There are many ways to be chivalrous and romantic without being financially dominating. Money ruins love.

He actually ended up being emotionally and verbally abusive when he couldn't deal with his own crippling lack of self-esteem and depression, so I wouldn't necessarily call him a good man. He was an average man, good at times and in some ways, and not so good in others. He refused to get help for his drinking and depression and threatened to disappear to his country of origin with our kids so that I would never see them again if I ever tried to leave him after we were married, so that was the end of that. Just because he was able to have an adult relationship that wasn't completely dominating of me doesn't mean he was a swell guy. There are lots of grey areas in life.

Edited for spelling.

well, I haven't missed much.

Bro, it ain't just the money that prevents me from being chivalrous.

It's applied to nearly all aspects of dating for me, including the fact I can't be holding the door open because that's 'oppressing' her. She's a free, independent, empowered woman, dammit, she don't need no man holding the door open for her. How DARE you even INSIST on doing such a thing, as it makes her feel non-empowered and 'oppressed'!

And, you don't need to tell me about anti-consumerism. I don't believe in the vast majority of holidays and find them all to be over-commercialized crap. I'd rather just write a poetic love letter, go for a nice walk, explore town together, than waste money on Valentine's Day on something more extravagant.

And, because I'm a Gryffindor, I tend to insist we appreciate a bit of traditional. Not sure how I'm being the 'dominating' one when it's the Feminist's who always have their way with me.

Trying to discuss things equally just results always in compromise on my part.

Maybe I'm over-exaggerating a bit - I genuinely liked the independence, headstrong, empowered personalities of the females I dated, but they didn't appreciate my wanting in a more equal power-dynamic.

Where is the 'I'm a feminist and I'm NOT offended by this thread' option? Meh.

Yeah, I don't get why a feminist must be offended by this thread, you wouldn't want to date those who say No anyway.

Exactly.

Feminism means the advocacy of women's rights and equality - this is the original meaning.

By default, every modern sane woman is a feminist unless she has some form of inferiority complex toward men or was too conditioned to think so.

But I think some are referring to those radical ultra-vocal feminists who get offended and loud at every tiny thing, like in this youtube video I've posted in the previous page.

You do realize that the power dynamics of a relationship are up to the parties involved to decide for themselves what suits them best? A healthy relationship is one where there is a mutual agreement about the power dynamics. NOT necessarily equality. A bad relationship is where one person tries to take the upper hand against the wishes of the other party. But I've seen many relationships where one person is the leader and the other is the follower and that's how they like it. I do wonder how common *true* equality in romantic relationships is and if it really works out well in the long run. And FYI I know of marriages where the woman is the one with the upper hand; it's not as rare as you might be inclined to think.

I don't believe that as an autonomous adult there is a healthy way for me to give up my choices to be made by someone else, no. That's what I mean by power dynamic--no one else makes personal choices for me. When a choice involves myself and a partner, then that choice should be made together based on what we agree upon and what our shared goals are. That is a healthy power balance--shared choices, shared responsibility. My individual choices (what I want to take in school, what I wear, who I talk to, where I go, etc.) are mine to make and remain mine to make whether I am in a relationship or not. If someone else is making your personal choices for you, that is codependence, not a healthy relationship.