What is the ideology of the modern feminist movement?

Hello! :)
Welcome!
I think I may be the only one still awake in this side of the world! The early risers will be up and running soon. They will be able to help, so let’s see what we can give them to work with.
You speak English as a second langue quite well! Good for you! It is such a difficult language at some points. You should be proud of yourself!
Now;
Debate team. Let’s see if I understand the given subject, OK?
Your topic is about femanism and it’s view of sex-change operations for men to become women, or women to become men? Or both?
And then how Femanists view this current and increasingly more accepted trend in today’s society?
I’m not sure about why you might be tying it into the 1920’s. That was the start of the era where women literally fought for the right to vote, and work to gain their beginning steps for being able to have their reproductive and health information available for all social and economic classes. They also began to offer safe places for women to go visit where they could find out about how to care for themselves, and their children/ families. Birth control and illnesses of women. The male-dominated field of medicine did not have as much experience with the female body and concerns. Often undertrained doctors were the only choice available up to this point in time for many women.
Do you need information on-
How is it to tie into the movement towards sexual reassignment surgery and the life-changing affects it brings about? The reaction of some to it’s becoming more discussed and accepted by more of the public?
Or
Are you needing to find out what the basis for the feminism movement as it is today? Or it’s changes through the 1900–2015 eras- so you can draw your needed debate ideas from this movement?
Or
Do you need to figure out points to help you with the assigned topic- as the Anti- or being against this newer trend of medical aid for people who wish to live their lives as they feel they really are- but ended up in the body of the wrong gender at birth?
Feminism today tends to be a little more splintered than efforts in the past.
A femanist movement’s sore point, that should have been dealt with long ago, in the 1970’s is still unequal about wage equality with men in several work-related fields.(and similar issues.)
Also, tell us what/how the matriarchal system question fits it to your topic, also.
Perhaps the next person can help you to narrow down just what basics you are interested in finding out.
Take a look at what we need to know, from the questions above in order to help you with your interest and your assigned topic a little better.
Write a reply back to help explain a little more and everyone here is good with their help and advise. Ok?
Take care, and I will look in to see how you’re doing with this a little while later.
Remember- help us help you by narrowing down what you need to know about.
Keep up the good work! Good luck with the debates! You’ll do well!
Take care!

The first thing to understand about any movement is that it is unlikely to have one single ideology. This is particularly true of a movement with a long history. In the beginning, feminism was closer to being a single ideology because it was focused on a small number of issues. Specifically, early feminism was focused on issues of legal (aka de jure) inequality (such as full property rights and the right to vote).

Gaining legal equality is only as meaningful as society’s willingness to enforce it, however, so the movement later began to focus on social (aka de facto) inequalities in addition to legal inequalities. This included the establishment of new legal rights and protections, such as reproductive rights and protections against workplace harassment.

Feminism today continues to be concerned with both de jure and de facto inequalities, but it has also started to focus more on the ways in which discrimination against women is related to other forms of discrimination (for example, discrimination based on race or economic class). This is called “intersectionality” (because it is about the places where sexism intersects with racism, classism, etc.).

This is not entirely new. Early feminists fought against slavery at the same time that they fought for women’s rights. And feminists have long seen the connection between the sexism and the economic disenfranchisement of women. But the movement hasn’t always been attuned to the way that the experience of being a woman can itself be affected by one’s race or economic class.

The experience of being a poor black woman, for instance, isn’t just the experience of being poor plus the experience of being black plus the experience of being a woman. There are prejudices that one is subjected to for being poor and black and a woman all at the same time (in part due to stereotypes about the particular combination). This is true of other combinations as well.

In part this is because stereotypes about being a member of one group might be either mitigated or exacerbated by stereotypes about being part of a different group. A wealthy white woman might be seen as being good with money while a wealthy black woman might be seen as being bad with money even if the prejudice about being bad with money is usually based on one’s sex and not one’s race.

Anyway, let’s look at your specific questions. First of all, feminists are not trying to establish a matriarchy. They are fundamentally an egalitarian movement dedicated to the equality of women. In fact, the name “feminism” was imposed on them from the outside. Early feminists did not call themselves “feminists.” They called themselves “suffragettes” when fighting for the right to vote and “abolitionists” when fighting against slavery. But since there was an identifiable subgroup of people fighting for both of these things, and since they were almost all women, they were labelled “feminists.” I’m sure you could find a few people on the fringes who think society would be better off if women were in charge. On a planet as big as Earth, you can find 50 examples of anything. But the main goal of feminism is de jure and de facto equality between the sexes.

As for arguments to use, it depends on whether you are arguing pro or con. I will give you some arguments for each side, as well as some ways of countering those arguments.

If you are arguing pro (that is, if you are supporting the claim that the feminist movement should oppose sex change operations), here are two arguments you might use:

(1) If men and women are fundamentally equal, then it shouldn’t matter which one you are. The desire for a sex change is ultimately a manifestation of inequality. People sense the differences that exist in society between men and women, and those who don’t fit in with the gender assigned to them at birth therefore feel pressured to change their bodies. But the change we need is in society. If real equality existed, people would not feel the pressure to change their bodies just to meet society’s norms and sex change operations would be unnecessary. The goal should be equality, then, not sex changes.

Counterargument: But wanting legal and social equality doesn’t mean that the experience of being a woman is the same as the experience of being a man. The experiences are different. But if the experiences are different, then a person could feel like they were assigned the wrong gender at birth even if we have achieved both legal and social equality. If men and women are really equal, then, it shouldn’t matter if someone wants to switch from one to the other. Neither is worse than the other, and what feminists should focus on is making sure that men and women are treated equally despite the differences in their experiences because those differences are not relevant to the inequalities feminists are fighting against.

(2) Movements are stronger the larger they are. This is why the gay rights movement didn’t really have much success until gay people started coming out of the closet in large numbers. Every female who transitions to male is one less woman fighting for equality.

Counterargument: Movements are indeed stronger the larger they are, but transitioning from female to male doesn’t mean that one has to stop being a feminist. Men can be feminists, and men who have experienced what it is like to be a woman are more likely to be feminists. Furthermore, if the feminist movement continues to focus on intersectionality, then it cannot ignore the experiences of trans women and men. Therefore, trans issues are feminist issues. Lastly, there are more males transitioning to females than females transitioning to males. So allowing sex changes actually increases the number of women in the world.

If you are arguing con (that is, if you are criticizing the claim that the feminist movement should oppose sex change operations), here are two arguments you might use.

(1) People who undergo sex changes will have experienced the way that society treats both men and women, giving them a unique perspective on how gender works in our society. Such people understand gender in a way that others do not, and they may be able to bring about better understanding between men and women who do not feel any need to change their sex.

Counterargument: We do not need “gender diplomats.” Women are perfectly capable of understanding the ways in which they are discriminated against without transitioning to being men, and men are not so stupid as to be incapable of understanding feminist arguments without transitioning to being women. And while other groups are frequently segregated away from their dominant counterparts, men and women interact constantly in society. Thus we can come to understand each other without the help of sex change operations, so this is not a good enough reason to allow them.

(2) Trans women are women. By forcing them to stay in male bodies, we would be complicit in their oppression. But feminists should never be complicit in the oppression of others—especially in the oppression of other women. Furthermore, trans men are treated as women prior to transitioning, and so they are subject to the same discrimination as women for much of their early lives. If feminism is concerned with all victims of sex discrimination, then they should be concerned with the experiences of trans men. In fact, discrimination against trans people is sex discrimination because they are being discriminated against for violating traditional gender norms. But one of the main goals of feminism is to make traditional gender norms optional (people can follow them if they want, but they should not be forced to obey them). So trans issues are feminist issues, and allowing trans people to get sex changes is crucial to the equality of trans people.

Counterargument: The experience of trans women is not the same as the experience of other women. Trans women did not grow up experiencing discrimination because of their sex during their crucial formative years. Trans men, meanwhile, are seeking to escape the discrimination faced by women by transitioning into men. So while trans interests may overlap with feminist issues in important ways, trans issues are not the same as feminist issues. Even if they were the same issues, however, allowing sex changes will not eliminate discrimination against women nor against trans people. That discrimination is indeed based on gender norms, and sex changes do not alter gender norms. In fact, sex change operations reinforce gender norms by telling people who do not fit into male gender norms that they should become women and by telling people who do not fit into female gender norms that they should become men.

Msh, thank you! Basically, I wanted to find out what the feminist movement is like today. You helped me with some basic understanding and the second comment made it more profound :)

SavoirFaire, thank you very much! This is just awesome :)
I was pro and my arguments were similar though not as clear as yours.
I live in a post-soviet country and the idea of feminist movement here is probably different and more subjective (many of my friends think that this is just about women willing to prove they are better and etc) though it is obviously not so as you’ve shown.
I only have one question left concerning the arguments. How would you explain why shoul or would this movement care about these operations at all?

@Maria_Khmelnitskaya That’s a good question. I actually found the debate topic a little strange precisely because I don’t think that feminists should care about sex change operations.

One reason why some feminists might care about sex change operations, though, is that they complicate our ideas about sex and gender. The existence of trans people makes it harder to define what a man is and what a woman is. A lot of feminist philosophy is written with the assumption that we can easily distinguish the two groups from one another. Sex change operations could make this more difficult to do. They might also worry about the degree to which trans women (that is, people who transition from male to female) really are women. There has been some debate about this over the past decade, some of which is reflected in the final counterargument of my previous answer.

The problem isn’t just theoretical, either. Historically, feminists have had a hard time achieving their goals because the movement kept being diverted by the concerns of other movements. In the United States, black men were allowed to vote before white women (or any women at all, in fact). This is in part because feminists dedicated themselves to the cause of black suffrage, and their own ambitions for women’s suffrage were temporarily ignored because of it. A lot of modern feminists therefore worry about things like gay rights or trans rights once again taking precedence over women’s rights. We can actually see this in recent US history. A lot of attention has been paid to making sure that same-sex couples have the right to marry. But with all the attention placed on that issue, there hasn’t been a lot of attention paid to the fact that women’s reproductive rights have been slowly eroded over the past 15 years.

Ultimately, I don’t personally believe that rights are a zero-sum game. We can focus on multiple movements at the same time. But it is difficult to get an entire country’s attention focused on more than one thing at once, so those feminists who are cautious about lending their support to other movements are not completely irrational. They can point to specific times in history when alliances with other groups cost them a lot and gained them nothing.

I find this question strange, for your debate class that is. When you specifically ask about the modern feminist movement I think third wave which is completely discombobulated compared to first and second wave. Third wave does not appear to be centralized and in some cases greatly hurting the movement. Google “slut walk” and you will see what I mean. It’s even spawning counter movement of equally aimless souls in the MRA, PA and MGTOW community. Opposing sex change operations suggests that gender is an exclusive club that you have to be born into and should not be allowed to participate in. It also subtle in suggesting that the genders are not equal. I hope you do not have to argue in favor of that. @SavoirFaire has solid advice for your debate, that said this is introducing you to these movements and I feel this debate topic was done so with that in mind. I fully support first and a good part of second wave feminism but I can’t help but see hate, anger, division and aimlessness in third wave (here in the states and Canada anyway). The rise of these counter movements is solid evidence something is not right. As a male I certainly do not feel comfortable being around them and this says quite a bit since I’m basically the easiest person to be around in person. Just a word of caution, when someone or some organization asks you to be angry or fight for a cause, especially if it is causing division between certain demographics cast an evil eye on it (they are probably using you). This day and age humanism should replace feminism IMHO.

@ARE_you_kidding_me Third wave feminism is precisely why I mentioned in my first answer that movements typically don’t have any single ideology. There are certainly some strange offshoots in modern days, but they are not mainstream. If they seem that way, it is only because they are shouting the loudest (and are more popular online than they are offline). Third wave feminism is largely about intersectionality. It is also, for the most part, “male friendly.” It includes the so-called “sex positive” feminists who reject calls to ban pornography, as well as those feminists who think we need to keep in mind the way that sexism harms men (e.g., by holding them to standards that are often just as unrealistic as society’s standards for women). Granted, some of this existed in second wave feminism as well. But it has become more of a priority in the era of third wave feminism (the waves referring to nothing more than time periods, after all, and not to specific ideologies).

I’m also not sure what you have against Slut Walk. It’s a reaction to the idea that a woman can deserve rape based on what she is wearing (and the original Slut Walk rallies were a reaction to two separate public officials—a police officer and a judge—suggesting that certain modes of dress were invitations to rape or could mitigate a rapist’s guilt). Assuming that you believe it is not okay to rape a woman regardless of how she is dressed, then you should at least support the idea behind Slut Walk. And the execution of the protest is just women dressing in certain ways and saying “this is not an invitation to rape me.” The mode of dress is part of the protest, and an important one.

Nor can I see blaming feminists for the reactions of a few pathetic men who cannot abide the loss of their undeserved advantages (which is what all of the various “men’s rights” movements are ultimately about). You might as well blame the Emancipation Proclamation for the KKK. Sure, there’s a sense in which the latter was a reaction to the former. But more fundamentally, it was born from the insecurity of its creators and their inability to accept change.

I also can’t help but roll my eyes whenever someone objects to the name “feminism.” For one thing, the name was not chosen by the movement’s members—it was, as I already mentioned, imposed on them. Second, “humanism” refers to a philosophical movement that rejects religion and the supernatural in favor of science and reason, and that emphasizes the value of human beings and human agency over devotion to God or the church. Perhaps the word you were looking for is “egalitarianism,” but feminism is already a form of egalitarianism. It’s the form focused on eradicating sexism, and it was named “feminism” largely due to the fact that the original members were nearly all women and the original focus on de jure equality translated into giving women all the rights that men had (since there were no rights held by women that weren’t already held by men as well).

The slut walk is something that I actually don’t agree with but more in the way it came about. Yes, I know it was a public official (a police officer) who was speaking and said something along the lines of “If you dress like a slut you are inviting rape” What he was trying to tell them was if you want to draw attention and make yourself statistically more likely to get raped dressing provocatively is going to do so. He was correct in saying this. People want to say this is victim blaming but it’s not any different than if he was saying that if you want to help prevent robbery don’t leave your doors unlocked. Criminals don’t need an invitation but if you don’t advertise you don’t put yourself at as much risk. The actual walks were organized by someone who seems to want to vector herself into the lime light and used this as a vehicle to do so. This has also reignited the “rape culture” thing that I don’t particularly see as being real in our culture in 2015.
I’m also going to say the name feminism does matter precisely because most will not look past it. They are the ones that need to hear what is being said the most. I also know about humanism and 2hat you are describing is closer to secular humanism. I should have added more detail earlier because I think it’s an underutilized movement that can be built to suit what feminism is doing on the sidelines with more weight as it will not automatically turn off 60 percent of one gender. It’s a solid foundation that can be built upon. In a sense hijacking that movement and repurposing and building it up because of its name. it also is a stealthy way to bring out social issues with religion

@ARE_you_kidding_me “What he was trying to tell them was if you want to draw attention and make yourself statistically more likely to get raped dressing provocatively is going to do so. He was correct in saying this.”

No, he was not. Statistically speaking, the correlation between mode of dress and rape is quite the opposite of what the officer assumed. Studies have found that women who dress “provocatively” are in fact less likely to be sexually assaulted than women who dress “modestly.” Rapists tend to find “provocatively” dressed women intimidating, whereas “modestly” dressed women given them an impression of passivity (which they take to be a sign that they are easy victims). This is not to say those impressions are accurate, of course, but it is how rapists tend to see things.

“The actual walks were organized by someone who seems to want to vector herself into the lime light and used this as a vehicle to do so.”

I’m not sure which of the organizers you are referring to here (there’s more than one). In any case, her motive—whatever it may be—reflects on her alone, not the movement.

“This has also reignited the “rape culture” thing that I don’t particularly see as being real in our culture in 2015.”

Before I respond to this comment, I would like to ask what you think “rape culture” means.

“I’m also going to say the name feminism does matter precisely because most will not look past it.”

There are two ways of understanding this comment. The first way says “it would be politically expedient to change the name because some people can’t see past it.” The second says “the reactions of other people, regardless of whether or not those reactions are based on complete ignorance, speak to the actual legitimacy of the name beyond political expediency.” The first reading might be somewhat plausible, though I still think it to be false. Those who attack feminism based on the name will not be mollified by a change of label. They are just too lazy to come up with an actual objection. The second reading is far less plausible, The reaction of a few bigots cannot determine the legitimacy of anything. The KKK won’t look past the color of some people’s skin, but that’s their problem. And it certainly doesn’t mean we should rename, say, the Congressional Black Caucus just to mollify them.

If that’s the case it will require further study on my part but I’m not surprised because it seems that actual serial rapists are after power and dominance and get their thrills from that. That would have them targeting people who appear easy and unsuspecting which you are correct in saying will not likely be the club culture type. That said I think provocative dress most likely puts people at risk in certain social situations especially when alcohol is involved. It’s not victim blaming it’s common sense. I still don’t fault the cop but I’ll look into the research a bit deeper when I’m not working so much. I see rape culture as defined by feminism to be broad and encompassing a great deal but in general it is a wide scale underestimation and downplaying of it with acceptance and even encouragement in male groups. In third world countries sure here, I don’t think so. Never seen any hint of it. If there is a down playing of rape it is rape against men and even that is a stretch because I think that is generally addressed also. I realize more academically inclined people understand what feminism is and is not, I don’t see this with a good number of supporters and an even greater number of non supporters. If it was as egalitarian as you say men’s issues would not be so glossed over they are to a degree even though they attempt to address some of them I think it needs a face and attitude change especially less shock value that ends up just turning people away. It’s got a HUGE image problem and I don’t see it ever getting over it because there is little cohesion or even understanding. In the end the effect I often see is often divisive. You may disagree but that’s how I see it.

@Maria_Khmelnitskaya
Hello Again!
I said that I would check in with you.
You sure have a Lot of information to work with now. Your question got a debate going on here also! Some topics get people involved and it sometimes causes serious discussions of diverse differences of opinion. It can get frustrating and tense sometimes, but that is a public forum. A blog that gives varying opinions a place to debate and discuss.
I really hope that some of the information helped your research. Take care and good luck with your debate! :)