<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Brilliance Of Catherine MacKinnon</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.feministfred.com/archives/42/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.feministfred.com/archives/42</link>
	<description>A place for men to learn about feminism.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Dec 2008 09:51:36 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Fred</title>
		<link>http://www.feministfred.com/archives/42#comment-366</link>
		<dc:creator>Fred</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 14:24:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministfred.com/?p=42#comment-366</guid>
		<description>Anyone can be a feminist, but you can't really be a feminist in the eyes of a radical feminist like myself unless you are not willing to identify as male, or buy into male supremacy. I think of myself as a human being, and try to reject the cultural identification "male" which has so much to do with oppressing women and so little to do with my slightly different genitalia.

Rejecting manliness doesn't mean that I embrace femininity, either. I reject both as artificial constructs of a patriarchal, male supremacist culture. They both are tools used to keep women in their place. 

So you can see why it might be silly to want to be a feminist man. It's like saying "I have no idea what I'm talking about!" But it's still better than being an openly oppressive manly-man lover.

I totally agree that if anyone wants to identify as a feminist, they should be encouraged! But that doesn't mean that they are above criticism, or should shrink away from the ongoing debate about what it is and what it could be if it were better.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone can be a feminist, but you can&#8217;t really be a feminist in the eyes of a radical feminist like myself unless you are not willing to identify as male, or buy into male supremacy. I think of myself as a human being, and try to reject the cultural identification &#8220;male&#8221; which has so much to do with oppressing women and so little to do with my slightly different genitalia.</p>
<p>Rejecting manliness doesn&#8217;t mean that I embrace femininity, either. I reject both as artificial constructs of a patriarchal, male supremacist culture. They both are tools used to keep women in their place. </p>
<p>So you can see why it might be silly to want to be a feminist man. It&#8217;s like saying &#8220;I have no idea what I&#8217;m talking about!&#8221; But it&#8217;s still better than being an openly oppressive manly-man lover.</p>
<p>I totally agree that if anyone wants to identify as a feminist, they should be encouraged! But that doesn&#8217;t mean that they are above criticism, or should shrink away from the ongoing debate about what it is and what it could be if it were better.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lars L.</title>
		<link>http://www.feministfred.com/archives/42#comment-364</link>
		<dc:creator>Lars L.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 May 2008 11:35:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feministfred.com/?p=42#comment-364</guid>
		<description>Interesting article, and wanna-be-feminist or not, he does have some points and misses some points as well.

Firstly I agree with him that men can be feminists at least in the etymological understanding of the word, they can support the female cause, they can work for it, they can be feminists.
You Fred, are an example of a male feminist.

However, and I believe you have stressed this plenty of times, there is the thing with how we use our words, how the male dominant culture is so deeply embedded within our culture that our very language reflects it, examples could be such as calling a boy or man, a "sissy" when he's not willing to do some task or another.

Its just an example of how our language promotes one gender above another, however is it an aspect that men cannot be a part of? Can a man not state to say MacKinnon that "Hey, I completly support your cause, but the words you use could be rephrased to catch a broader audience and as such help the cause".

I have not read MacKinnon, so I could not say if the above example has any validity, the concept of this statement however is not about her, its about how to improve the cause.

He may not be as good as any of those mentioned, but he is a take on it and he might be someone for people to "connect" to, ie. an entryway into feminism.

People like Twisty's might be much better at it than him, but they are also rather advanced and sometimes shoot shrapnel hitting a newcomer who may be sympathic and make her (or him), run off never wanting to support feminism ever again.

If equeal rights, and this is what I personally want, is to have a chance then people must wake up and understand that we are two genders and that both genders need to help on this, for the greater good of us all.

Having a few elitists who does it better, does not further the cause the slightest, that is just preaching to the flock.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting article, and wanna-be-feminist or not, he does have some points and misses some points as well.</p>
<p>Firstly I agree with him that men can be feminists at least in the etymological understanding of the word, they can support the female cause, they can work for it, they can be feminists.<br />
You Fred, are an example of a male feminist.</p>
<p>However, and I believe you have stressed this plenty of times, there is the thing with how we use our words, how the male dominant culture is so deeply embedded within our culture that our very language reflects it, examples could be such as calling a boy or man, a &#8220;sissy&#8221; when he&#8217;s not willing to do some task or another.</p>
<p>Its just an example of how our language promotes one gender above another, however is it an aspect that men cannot be a part of? Can a man not state to say MacKinnon that &#8220;Hey, I completly support your cause, but the words you use could be rephrased to catch a broader audience and as such help the cause&#8221;.</p>
<p>I have not read MacKinnon, so I could not say if the above example has any validity, the concept of this statement however is not about her, its about how to improve the cause.</p>
<p>He may not be as good as any of those mentioned, but he is a take on it and he might be someone for people to &#8220;connect&#8221; to, ie. an entryway into feminism.</p>
<p>People like Twisty&#8217;s might be much better at it than him, but they are also rather advanced and sometimes shoot shrapnel hitting a newcomer who may be sympathic and make her (or him), run off never wanting to support feminism ever again.</p>
<p>If equeal rights, and this is what I personally want, is to have a chance then people must wake up and understand that we are two genders and that both genders need to help on this, for the greater good of us all.</p>
<p>Having a few elitists who does it better, does not further the cause the slightest, that is just preaching to the flock.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
