..using the completely contrived (and incorrect) definition of "feminism" that asserts anyone who believes in equality is a feminist.
That is not how groups work.
I believe that black people should have the same rights as everyone else too, but that does not make me a member of the "black power" movement. I believe in meditation and stilling of the mind, but that does not make me a Buddhist.
Why is feminism the only group that tries to claim dominion over otherwise unaffiliated people? As far as I know, it is unique in that respect. I can't think of any other ideology, good or bad, that operates in this way.
Given the behavior of prominent/famous feminists (say, campaigning for the abolition of due process, which is the single most fucked up thing I think I've read this year), that is not a label I want to be anywhere near. It is anti-intellectual, it is toxic, and I want nothing to do with it.
..and Feminism is far from the only ideology that believes in equality for all, yet is literally the only one that tries to claim I'm a member because I believe in equality.
Seriously, you did it, to me, in your original post.
Why is that? What is the authoritative definition you use that allows you to presume other people's ideologies in such a way?
I asked a couple of very simple questions. I've got a donut in front of me, some code open in another window, and enjoying a snowy Friday. Believe me, I'm calm :)
Unfortunately, once again, you kind of didn't directly answer what I asked you. I'm starting to sense a pattern here.
Let's try this again:
What is the authoritative definition you use that allows you to presume other people's ideologies in such a way?
As previously mentioned, I do not wish to be associated with feminism in any sense, broad or otherwise, because of its ever increasing association with (ir|a)rationality and toxicity. I prefer to be called a humanist, or an egalitarian, because I believe in equality for all, not just for a particular sex.
With that in mind, I'm asking you to define, preferably from a dispassionate and neutral source, how you can claim that label applies to someone. From what I can see, the "if you believe in women's rights, you are a feminist" definition is circular and held primarily by self-described feminists. If you have any evidence to the contrary, I would love to see it.
>You can chill out. I'm not trying to recruit you.
Regardless of whether you did this intentionally or whether you just naively spouted this, it's a really shitty tactic to employ when conversing with people.
the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.
synonyms: the women's movement, the feminist movement, women's liberation, female emancipation, women's rights; informalwomen's lib
"a longtime advocate of feminism"
> Why is feminism the only group that tries to claim dominion over otherwise unaffiliated people?
Its not. Lots of groups movement groups claim that most everyone believes whatever their key belief is, its a standard rhetorical strategy to leverage the common desire to fit in.
..using the completely contrived (and incorrect) definition of "feminism" that asserts anyone who believes in equality is a feminist.
That is not how groups work.
I believe that black people should have the same rights as everyone else too, but that does not make me a member of the "black power" movement. I believe in meditation and stilling of the mind, but that does not make me a Buddhist.
Why is feminism the only group that tries to claim dominion over otherwise unaffiliated people? As far as I know, it is unique in that respect. I can't think of any other ideology, good or bad, that operates in this way.
Given the behavior of prominent/famous feminists (say, campaigning for the abolition of due process, which is the single most fucked up thing I think I've read this year), that is not a label I want to be anywhere near. It is anti-intellectual, it is toxic, and I want nothing to do with it.